Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35278266›Full record

ArticleMusculoskeletal care2022

Use, and acceptability, of digital health technologies in musculoskeletal physical therapy: A survey of physical therapists and patients.

M Merolli, K Gray, D Choo, B J Lawford, R S Hinman

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Musculoskeletal care, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.0field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

M MerolliDepartment of Physiotherapy, School of Health Sciences, Centre for Health, Exercise, and Sports Medicine, Faculty of Medicine Dentistry & Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-4273-1816
K GrayCentre for Digital Transformation of Health, Faculty of Medicine Dentistry & Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
D ChooCentre for Digital Transformation of Health, Faculty of Medicine Dentistry & Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
B J LawfordDepartment of Physiotherapy, School of Health Sciences, Centre for Health, Exercise, and Sports Medicine, Faculty of Medicine Dentistry & Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0392-6058
R S HinmanDepartment of Physiotherapy, School of Health Sciences, Centre for Health, Exercise, and Sports Medicine, Faculty of Medicine Dentistry & Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-6368-9456
The University of Melbourne · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesDetermine (a) frequency of digital health use to obtain/record clinical information (pre-COVID-19); (b) willingness to use digital technologies among physical therapists and patients with musculoskeletal conditions.

methods102 physical therapists, and 103 patients were recruited in Australia. An electronic survey ascertained (a) demographic/clinical characteristics, (b) frequency of methods to obtain and record clinical information; (c) willingness to use digital technologies to support musculoskeletal care.

resultsPhysical therapists mostly used non-digital methods to obtain subjective (e.g., face-to-face questioning, n = 98; 96.1%) and objective information (e.g., visual estimation, n = 95; 93.1%). The top three digital health technologies most frequently used by therapists: photo-based image capture (n = 19; 18.6%), accessing information logged/tracked by patients into a mobile app (n = 14; 13.7%), and electronic systems to capture subjective information that the patient fills in (n = 13; 12.7%). The top three technologies used by patients: activity trackers (n = 27; 26.2%), logging/tracking health information on mobile apps or websites (n = 12; 11.7%), and entering information on a computer (n = 12; 7.8%). Physical therapists were most willing to use technologies for: receiving diagnostic imaging results (n = 99; 97.1%), scheduling appointments (n = 92; 90.2%) and capturing diagnostic results (n = 92; 90.2%). Patients were most willing to use technologies for receiving notifications about health test results (n = 91; 88.4%), looking up health information (n = 83; 80.6%) and receiving personalised alerts/reminders (n = 80; 77.7%).

conclusionsPhysical therapists and patients infrequently use digital health technologies to support musculoskeletal care, but expressed some willingness to consider using them for select functions.

Indexed as

COVID-19Mobile ApplicationsPhysical TherapistsDigital TechnologyHumansPhysical Therapy Modalitiesdigital health technologiesmusculoskeletal conditionsmusculoskeletal painphysical therapy

Identifiers

PMID35278266
PMCPMC9542958
OpenAlexW4220682951

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.