ArticleBMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation2023
Knowledge and practice of the physical activity prescription by generalists and specialist physicians of the city of Kinshasa: a cross-sectional study.
Article in BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe health benefits of regular physical activity (PA) are well documented. However, several people in both developed and developing countries do not meet PA recommendations. Health professionals are believed to be potential PA promoters. The purpose of this study is to gain insight into general and specialist practitioners' knowledge, practices and PA prescription-related factors in private and public hospitals in Kinshasa.
methodsA multicenter cross-sectional analytical study was conducted among general and specialist practitioners in the Democratic Republic of the Congo's capital using a declarative and anonymous questionnaire.
resultsOverall, 40.2% of the participants were interested in their patient's PA, 2.3% prescribed PA, and 0.9% did it correctly. Specialist physicians (SPs) prescribed PA more frequently than general practitioners (GP), and private hospital physicians prescribed PA more frequently than public hospital physicians. Five factors were independently associated with participants in prescribing PA: being in a private hospital increased the likelihood of prescribing PA by twofold (aOR, 1.83; 95% CI, 0.99-3.39; p = 0.055), being an SP increased the likelihood by sixfold (aOR, 6.22; 95% CI, 3.78-10.51; p = 0.000), being an internist increase the likelihood by sixfold (aOR, 5.81; 95% CI, 3.45-9.78; p = 0.000), being cardiologist by a factor of 12 (aOR, 12.91; 95% CI, 4.37-38.15; p = 0.000) and knowing the benefits of PA by a factor of 2 (aOR, 2.29; 95% CI, 1.29-4.08; p = 0.006). The most common reason given for a lack of interest in patients' PA, followed by a lack of knowledge about current PA prescribing recommendations and a lack of time.
conclusionsSPs and professionals in the private health sector were the most interested in their patients' PA. A small portion of them actually prescribed it, and only a tiny proportion did it correctly. This bleak picture highlights a need to rethink the undergraduate medical curricula, especially about teachings on the importance and use of PA as a medicine in its own right in disease prevention and treatment.
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.