Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35302642›Full record

ArticlePhysical therapy2022

Primary Care Physical Therapists' Experiences When Screening for Serious Pathologies Among Their Patients: A Qualitative Study.

Cecilie Rud Budtz, Helle Rønn-Smidt, Janus Nikolaj Laust Thomsen, Rikke Pilegaard Hansen, David Høyrup Christiansen

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Physical therapy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
4.5field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. A Pilot Study of a Synchronous Virtual Ultrasound Imaging Module for Physiotherapy Education.Physiotherapy research international : the journal for researchers and clinicians in physical therapy · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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 4 institutions in 1 country.

Cecilie Rud BudtzGoedstrup Hospital, Department of Occupational Medicine - University Research Clinic, Herning, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0003-0834-6594
Helle Rønn-SmidtVIA University College, Holstebro, Denmark.
Janus Nikolaj Laust ThomsenAalborg University, Center for General Practice, Aalborg, Denmark.
Rikke Pilegaard HansenCentral Denmark Region, Viborg, Denmark.
David Høyrup ChristiansenGoedstrup Hospital, Department of Occupational Medicine - University Research Clinic, Herning, Denmark.
Aalborg University · DKAarhus University · DKCentral Denmark Region · DKVIA University College · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveA vital part of the initial examination performed by a physical therapist is to establish whether the patient would benefit from physical therapist intervention. This process includes knowledge about contraindications for treatment and screening for serious pathologies. However, little is known about the physical therapists' views and thoughts about their own practice when screening for serious pathologies. The purpose of this study was to explore the experience gained by physical therapists when screening for serious pathologies among their patients.

methodsThis was a qualitative study based on individual semi-structured interviews with 9 primary care physical therapists. The interviews were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis, and generated themes were explained and reported with relevant quotes.

resultsThree overall themes were generated: (1) the role of physical therapists in the diagnostic process; (2) responsibility from the individual to the group; and (3) the difficult task of cooperation. The physical therapists described how they relied more on their clinical suspicion than on asking red-flag questions when screening for serious pathologies. They also questioned their differential diagnostic abilities. Finally, they saw a potential to further enhance their confidence in the area by reflecting on the matter with colleagues and by receiving more feedback about their clinical reasoning regarding serious pathologies from general practitioners.

conclusionThese findings suggest that physical therapists primarily rely on their clinical suspicion when screening for serious pathologies but at the same time are uncertain about their differential diagnostic abilities. IMPACT: These findings can inform future interventions targeting the physical therapists' abilities to detect serious pathology.

Indexed as

Physical TherapistsHumansMass ScreeningPrimary Health CareQualitative ResearchPrimary CareQualitativeRed FlagsSerious Pathology

Identifiers

PMID35302642
PMCPMC9155951
OpenAlexW4220807814

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.