What factors explain the number of physical therapy treatment sessions in patients referred with low back pain; a multilevel analysis

BACKGROUND: It is well-known that the number of physical therapy treatment sessions varies over treatment episodes. Information is lacking, however, on the source and explanation of the variation. The purposes of the current study are: 1) to determine how the variance in the number of physical therapy treatment sessions in patients with non-specific low back pain (LBP) in the Netherlands is distributed over patient level, therapist level and practice level; and 2) to determine the factors that explain the variance. METHODS: Data were used from a national registration network on physical therapy. Our database contained information on 1,733 patients referred with LBP, treated by 97 therapists working in 41 practices. The variation in the number of treatment sessions was investigated by means of multilevel regression analyses. RESULTS: Eighty-eight per cent of the variation in the number of treatment sessions for patients with LBP is located at patient level and seven per cent is located at practice level. It was possible to explain thirteen per cent of all variance. The duration of the complaint, prior therapy, and the patients' age and gender in particular are related to the number of physical therapy treatment sessions. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that the number of physical therapy treatment sessions in patients with LBP mainly depends on patient characteristics. More variation needs to be explained, however, to improve the transparency of care. Future research should examine the contribution of psychosocial factors, baseline disability, and the ability to learn motor behavior as possible factors in the variation in treatment sessions

Factors associated with physiotherapy provision in a population of elderly nursing home residents; a cross sectional study

BACKGROUND: Although physiotherapy (PT) plays an important role in improving activities of daily living (ADL functioning) and discharge rates, it is unclear how many nursing home residents receive treatment. Furthermore, there is a lack of insight into the determinants that influence the decision for treatment. In this study, we investigated how many nursing home residents receive PT. In addition, we analysed the factors that contribute to the variation in the provision of PT both between nursing homes and between residents. METHODS: A random sample of 600 elderly residents was taken from a random sample of 15 nursing homes. Residents had to be admitted for rehabilitation or for long-term care. Data were collected through interviews with the nursing home physician and the physiotherapist. Multilevel analysis was used to define the variation in the provision of PT and the factors that are associated with the question whether a resident receives PT or not. Furthermore the amount of PT provided was analysed and the factors that are associated with this. RESULTS: On average 69% of the residents received PT. The percentage of patients receiving treatment differed significantly across nursing homes, and especially the number of physiotherapists available, explained this difference between nursing homes. Residents admitted to a somatic ward for rehabilitation, and male residents in general, were most likely to receive PT. Residents who were treated by a physiotherapist received on average 55 minutes (sd 41) treatment a week. Residents admitted for rehabilitation received more PT a week, as were residents with a status after a total hip replacement. CONCLUSION: PT is most likely to be provided to residents on a somatic ward, recently admitted for rehabilitation to a nursing home, which has a relatively large number of physiotherapists. This suggests a potential under-use of PT for long-term residents with cognitive problems. It is recommended that physiotherapists reconsider which residents may benefit from treatment. This may require a shift in the focus of physiotherapists from 'recovery and discharge' to 'quality of life and well-being'

Comparing patient characteristics and treatment processes in patients receiving physical therapy in the United States, Israel and the Netherlands. Cross sectional analyses of data from three clinical databases

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Many assume that outcomes from physical therapy research in one country can be generalized to other countries. However, no well designed studies comparing outcomes among countries have been conducted. In this exploratory study, our goal was to compare patient demographics and treatment processes in outpatient physical therapy practice in the United States, Israel and the Netherlands.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Cross-sectional data from three different clinical databases were examined. Data were selected for patients aged 18 years and older and started an episode of outpatient therapy between January 1^st2005 and December 31^st2005. Results are based on data from approximately 63,000 patients from the United States, 100,000 from Israel and 12,000 from the Netherlands.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Age, gender and the body part treated were similar in the three countries. Differences existed in episode duration of the health problem, with more patients with chronic complaints treated in the United States and Israel compared to the Netherlands. In the United States and Israel, physical agents and mechanical modalities were applied more often than in the Netherlands. The mean number of visits per treatment episode, adjusted for age, gender, and episode duration, varied from 8 in Israel to 11 in the United States and the Netherlands.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The current study showed that clinical databases can be used for comparing patient demographic characteristics and for identifying similarities and differences among countries in physical therapy practice. However, terminology used to describe treatment processes and classify patients was different among databases. More standardisation is required to enable more detailed comparisons. Nevertheless the differences found in number of treatment visits per episode imply that one has to be careful to generalize outcomes from physical therapy research from one country to another.</p

Vitality and the course of limitations in activities in osteoarthritis of the hip or knee

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The objective of the study was to determine whether psychological and social factors predict the course of limitations in activities in elderly patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee, in addition to established somatic and cognitive risk factors.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A longitudinal cohort study with a follow-up period of three years was conducted. Patients (N = 237) with hip or knee osteoarthritis were recruited from rehabilitation centers and hospitals. Body functions, comorbidity, cognitive functioning, limitations in activities and psychological and social factors (mental health, vitality, pain coping and perceived social support) were assessed. Statistical analyses included univariate and multivariate regression analyses. Psychological and social factors were added to a previously developed model with body functions, comorbidity and cognitive functioning.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>In knee OA, low vitality has a negative impact on the course of self-reported and performance-based limitations in activities, after controlling for somatic and cognitive factors. In hip OA, psychological and social factors had no additional contribution to the model.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Low vitality predicts deterioration of limitations in activities in elderly patients with osteoarthritis of the knee, in addition to established somatic and cognitive risk factors. However, the contribution of vitality is relatively small. Results of this study are relevant for the group of patients with knee or hip OA, attending hospitals and rehabilitation centers.</p

Non-pharmacological care for patients with generalized osteoarthritis: design of a randomized clinical trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Non-pharmacological treatment (NPT) is a useful treatment option in the management of hip or knee osteoarthritis. To our knowledge however, no studies have investigated the effect of NPT in patients with generalized osteoarthritis (GOA). The primary aim of this study is to compare the effectiveness of two currently existing health care programs with different intensity and mode of delivery on daily functioning in patients with GOA. The secondary objective is to compare the cost-effectiveness of both interventions.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>In this randomized, single blind, clinical trial with active controls, we aim to include 170 patients with GOA. The experimental intervention consist of six self-management group sessions provided by a multi-disciplinary team (occupational therapist, physiotherapist, dietician and specialized nurse). The active control group consists of two group sessions and four sessions by telephone, provided by a specialized nurse and physiotherapist. Both therapies last six weeks. Main study outcome is daily functioning during the first year after the treatment, assessed on the Health Assessment Questionnaire. Secondary outcomes are health related quality of life, specific complaints, fatigue, and costs. Illness cognitions, global perceived effect and self-efficacy, will also be assessed for a responder analysis. Outcome assessments are performed directly after the intervention, after 26 weeks and after 52 weeks.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>This article describes the design of a randomized, single blind, clinical trial with a one year follow up to compare the costs and effectiveness of two non-pharmacological interventions with different modes of delivery for patients with GOA.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>Dutch Trial Register NTR2137</p

Medication adherence in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a critical appraisal of the existing literature

Item does not contain fulltextAdherence to medication in patients with rheumatoid arthritis is low, varying from 30 to 80%. Improving adherence to therapy could therefore dramatically improve the efficacy of drug therapy. Although indicators for suboptimal adherence can be useful to identify nonadherent patients, and could function as targets for adherence-improving interventions, no indicators are yet found to be consistently and strongly related to nonadherence. Despite this, nonadherence behavior could conceptually be categorized into two subtypes: unintentional (due to forgetfulness, regimen complexity or physical problems) and intentional (based on the patient's decision to take no/less medication). In case of intentional nonadherence, patients seem to make a benefit-risk analysis weighing the perceived risks of the treatment against the perceived benefits. This weighing process may be influenced by the patient's beliefs about medication, the patient's self-efficacy and the patient's knowledge of the disease. This implicates that besides tackling practical barriers, clinicians should be sensitive to patient's personal beliefs that may impact medication adherence

Occupational therapy for children with cerebral palsy.

Objectives: The object of our systematic review, therefore, was to determine whether OT interventions improve functional abilities and social participation in children with cerebral palsy. Criteria for considering Studies for this Review: Types of studies: Studies with one of the following designs will be entered in the review. 1) Randomised controlled clinical trial (RCT): An experiment in which investigators randomly allocate eligible people into treatment and control groups. Cross-over trials will be considered as RCTs according to the Cochrane Collaboration Guidelines (Clarke 2000). 2) Controlled clinical trial (CCT): an experiment in which eligible people are in a non-randomized way allocated to the treatment and the control groups 3) Other than controlled designs (OD): patient series and pre-post studies. Such ODs can only contribute in a limited way to the best evidence synthesis. Types of participants: Studies with children/ adolescents aged <20 years with a clinical diagnosis of cerebral palsy will be included. Types of intervention: Occupational therapy interventions will be regarded as "comprehensive OT" (when all five intervention categories are part of the evaluated OT treatment) or will be classified into five specific intervention categories: 1) training of sensory-motor functions; 2) training of skills; 3) parental counselling; 4) advice or instruction regarding the use of assistive devices; and 5) provision of splints. All studies with above specified interventions according to a group of four experienced occupational therapists and reviewer CHME (see Methods of the review) are eligible for inclusion in this review. Types of outcome measures: Primary outcome measures: Functional ability and/or social participation. Secondary outcome measures: Motor-function (either balance or arm-hand function) and/or muscle tone