ArticleBMJ open2019
Cross-sectional survey of orthotic service provision in the UK: does where you live affect the service you receive?
Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Objective Methods of Monitoring Usage of Orthotic Devices for the Extremities: A Systematic Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Pooled it
- Practicality of Using Pressure Sensors and Accelerometers to Quantify Hand Orthosis Compliance at Home.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Article
- Exploration of the representation of the allied health professions in senior leadership positions in the UK National Health Service.BMJ leader · 2024Article
- Orthotist involvement in early gait rehabilitation after stroke: A cross-sectional survey of orthotists in the United Kingdom.Prosthetics and orthotics international · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate the quantity and quality of orthotic service provision within the UK.
designCross-sectional survey obtained through freedom of information request in 2017.
settingNational Health Service (NHS) Trusts/Health Boards (HBs) across the UK.
main outcome measuresDescriptive statistics of survey results, including information related to finance, volume of appointments, patients and orthotic products, waiting times, staffing, complaints, outcome measures and key performance indicators.
resultsResponses were received from 61% (119/196) of contacted Trusts/HBs; 86% response rate from Scotland (12/14) and Wales (6/7), 60% (3/5) from Northern Ireland and 58% (98/170) from England. An inhouse service was provided by 32% (35/110) of responses and 68% (74/110) were funded by a block contract. Long waiting times for appointments and lead times for footwear/orthoses, and large variations in patient entitlements for orthotic products across Trusts/HBs were evident. Variations in the length of appointment times were also evident between regions of the UK and between contracted and inhouse services, with all appointment times relatively short. There was evidence of improvements in service provision; ability for direct general practitioner referral and orthotic services included within multidisciplinary clinics. However, this was not found in all Trusts/HBs.
conclusionsThe aim to provide a complete UK picture of orthotic service provision was hindered by the low response rate and limited information provided in some responses, with greater ability of Trusts/HBs to answer questions related to quantity of service than those that reflect quality. However, results highlight the large discrepancies in service provision between Trusts/HBs, the gaps in data capture and the need for the UK NHS to establish appropriate processes to record the quantity and quality of orthotic service provision. In addition to standardising appointment times across the NHS, guidelines on product entitlements for patients and their lead times should be prescribed to promote equity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.