ArticlePloS one2023
Patient satisfaction with advanced physiotherapy practice internationally: Protocol for a systematic mixed studies review.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
rationalePatient satisfaction is a complex construct consisting of human and system attributes. Patient satisfaction can afford insight into patient experience, itself a key component of evaluating healthcare quality. Internationally, advanced physiotherapy practice (APP) extends across clinical fields and is characterised as a higher level of practice with a high degree of autonomy and complex decision making. Patient satisfaction with APP appears positive. While evidence synthesis of patient satisfaction with APP exists, no systematic review has synthesised evidence across clinical fields. Therefore, the objectives of this systematic review are 1) to evaluate patient satisfaction with APP internationally, and 2) to evaluate human and system attributes of patient satisfaction with APP. MATERIALS AND
methodsA systematic mixed studies review using a parallel-results convergent synthesis design will be conducted. Searches of Medline, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL, Cochrane, PEDro and grey literature databases will be conducted from inception to 18/7/2023. Studies of APP (World Physiotherapy definition) whereby practitioners a) have advanced clinical and analytical skills that influence service improvement and provide clinical leadership, b) have post-registration masters level specialisation (or equivalence), c) deliver safe, competent care to patients with complex needs and d) may use particular occupational titles; that measure patient satisfaction across all clinical fields and countries will be included. Two reviewers will screen studies, extract data, assess methodological quality of included studies (mixed methods appraisal tool), and contribute to data synthesis. Quantitative data will undergo narrative synthesis (textual descriptions) and qualitative data thematic synthesis (analytical themes). Integration of data syntheses will inform discussion. IMPLICATIONS: This systematic review will provide insight into patient satisfaction with APP internationally, exploring attributes that influence satisfaction. This will aid design, implementation, or improvement of APP and facilitate the delivery of patient-centred, high-quality healthcare. Lastly, this review will inform future methodologically robust research investigating APP patient satisfaction and experience.
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.