Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25889368›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2015

The effect of patient, provider and financing regulations on the intensity of ambulatory physical therapy episodes: a multilevel analysis based on routinely available data.

Patricia Halfon, Yves Eggli, Yves Morel, Patrick Taffé

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. How to become a strategic purchaser of rehabilitation services.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2022
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Patricia HalfonInstitute of Social and Preventive Medicine (IUMSP), University Hospital Center and Faculty of Biology and Medicine, Biopole 2, Route de la Corniche 10, 1010, Lausanne, Switzerland. patricia.halfon@chuv.ch.
Yves EggliInstitute of Social and Preventive Medicine (IUMSP), University Hospital Center and Faculty of Biology and Medicine, Biopole 2, Route de la Corniche 10, 1010, Lausanne, Switzerland. yves.eggli@bluewin.ch.
Yves MorelInstitute of Health Economics and Management, University Hospital Center and University of Lausanne, Route de Chavannes 31, 1015, Lausanne, Switzerland. yves.morel@fully.ch.
Patrick TafféInstitute of Social and Preventive Medicine (IUMSP), University Hospital Center and Faculty of Biology and Medicine, Biopole 2, Route de la Corniche 10, 1010, Lausanne, Switzerland. patrick.taffe@chuv.ch.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMany studies have found considerable variations in the resource intensity of physical therapy episodes. Although they have identified several patient- and provider-related factors, few studies have examined their relative explanatory power. We sought to quantify the contribution of patients and providers to these differences and examine how effective Swiss regulations are (nine-session ceiling per prescription and bonus for first treatments).

methodsOur sample consisted of 87,866 first physical therapy episodes performed by 3,365 physiotherapists based on referrals by 6,131 physicians. We modeled the number of visits per episode using a multilevel log linear regression with crossed random effects for physiotherapists and physicians and with fixed effects for cantons. The three-level explanatory variables were patient, physiotherapist and physician characteristics.

resultsThe median number of sessions was nine (interquartile range 6-13). Physical therapy use increased with age, women, higher health care costs, lower deductibles, surgery and specific conditions. Use rose with the share of nine-session episodes among physiotherapists or physicians, but fell with the share of new treatments. Geographical area had no influence. Most of the variance was explained at the patient level, but the available factors explained only 4% thereof. Physiotherapists and physicians explained only 6% and 5% respectively of the variance, although the available factors explained most of this variance. Regulations were the most powerful factors.

conclusionAgainst the backdrop of abundant physical therapy supply, Swiss financial regulations did not restrict utilization. Given that patient-related factors explained most of the variance, this group should be subject to closer scrutiny. Moreover, further research is needed on the determinants of patient demand.

Indexed as

Ambulatory CareEpisode of CareGovernment RegulationPatientsPhysical TherapistsPhysical Therapy ModalitiesAdultAgedDatabases, FactualFemaleHealth Care CostsHumansLinear ModelsMaleMiddle AgedMultilevel Analysis

Identifiers

PMID25889368
PMCPMC4325958

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.