Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34583834›Full record

ArticlePhysiotherapy2021

Evaluation of the First Contact Physiotherapy (FCP) model of primary care: a qualitative insight.

R Goodwin, F Moffatt, P Hendrick, S Stynes, A Bishop, P Logan

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Physiotherapy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07112508 (PRISM), which is not on this map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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.

NCT07112508 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

PRISM: The PRimary Care Individual Social Norms MSK Data Dashboard: a Cluster Randomised Feasibility Trial in Clinician Management of Musculoskeletal Patients.

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity College, LondonRan2026 to 2027Enrolled60ConditionsMusculoskeletal DisordersArmsPRISM dashboard is a data report, THe usual care intervention is a first contact physiotherapy service.
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Challenges and enablers to implementation of the Additional Roles Reimbursement Scheme in primary care: a qualitative study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2024
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors.

R GoodwinDivision of Rehabilitation, Ageing and Wellbeing, Faculty of Medicine & Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, United Kingdom. Electronic address: Rob.Goodwin@nottingham.ac.uk.
F MoffattPhysiotherapy and Sport Rehabilitation, Faculty of Medicine & Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, United Kingdom.
P HendrickPhysiotherapy and Sport Rehabilitation, Faculty of Medicine & Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, United Kingdom.
S StynesKeele University, School of Medicine, Keele, United Kingdom; Midlands Partnership Foundation NHS Trust, Haywood Hospital Spinal Interface Service, Staffordshire, United Kingdom.
A BishopKeele University, School of Medicine, Keele, United Kingdom.
P LoganDivision of Rehabilitation, Ageing and Wellbeing, Faculty of Medicine & Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveFirst Contact Physiotherapy (FCP) is a primary care model where expert musculoskeletal (MSK) physiotherapists undertake the first patient consultation, to enhance MSK-patient care and free-up GP capacity. The authors report the qualitative findings from the FCP National Evaluation (Phase 3) which evaluated the FCP model against pre-agreed success criteria. DESIGN AND

settingA mixed-methods 24-month service evaluation involving FCP sites across England.

methodsData were collected at 2 time points, year 1 and year 2. Data were collected using individual interviews and focus groups, transcribed verbatim and analysed using a hybrid inductive and deductive thematic analysis. Participants were recruited from all stakeholder groups; patients, physiotherapists, general practitioners and administration staff.

resultsA total of 6 sites were recruited over both rounds of data collection demonstrating a wide range of service models. Thirty-nine participants were recruited including fourteen patients. All six qualitative success criteria were met. GPs' discourse reflected confidence in the FCP service and competence of the FCPs. Patient discourse reflected self-efficacy and confidence in self-management techniques and reported FCP as a positive experience. FCPs saw providing advice about work related issues as integral to their role and patient discourse reflected perceived benefit from the advice offered. Staff discourse reflected a positive experience of working with, and in, the FCP services.

conclusionAhead of the planned scale-up of the FCP primary care model across the UK, this evaluation provides useful insights and recommendations to facilitate successful FCP implementation in terms of patient outcome and experience, and staff experience.

Indexed as

General PractitionersPhysical TherapistsHumansPhysical Therapy ModalitiesPrimary Health CareReferral and ConsultationFirst Contact PhysiotherapyGeneral practiceMusculoskeletalPrimary care

Identifiers

PMID34583834
PMCPMC8612276

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.