ArticleJournal of physical therapy science2021
Changes in availability and usage of electrophysical agents by physical therapists: a 5 year longitudinal follow-up study.
Article in Journal of physical therapy science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
[Purpose] There have been concerns that the availability and usage of electrophysical agents have decreased, based on data from cross-sectional surveys. The aim of this study was to conduct the first five-year follow-up longitudinal survey to determine the changes in the availability and usage of electrophysical agents in Nagano Prefecture, Japan. [Participants and Methods] This longitudinal observational study employed the same postal questionnaire survey of practicing clinicians in 2014 and 2019. A total of 22 modalities had been selected for inclusion in the questionnaire based on what is used in clinical facilities and hospitals. [Results] The response rate was 71% and 63% for 2014 and 2019, respectively. The modalities that were high in availability and usage for both 2014 and 2019 were hot packs, ultrasound, cryotherapy and low frequency. While most modalities demonstrated a decreased trend in usage, electrical stimulation devices increased from 2014 to 2019. The results also demonstrated that usage was affected by gender (males greater than females), years of experience (older greater than younger), qualifications (diplomas greater than degrees), and confidence (confident greater than non-confident). [Conclusion] Our results may assist educators with designing educational curricula that is consistent with the needs of clinicians.
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.