Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38658939›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2024

Feasibility of a quality-improvement program based on routinely collected health outcomes in Dutch primary care physical therapist practice: a mixed-methods study.

Lsf Smeekens, A C Verburg, Mjm Maas, R van Heerde, A van Kerkhof, P J van der Wees

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Lsf SmeekensScientific Institute for Quality of Healthcare, Radboud university medical center, Kapittelweg 54, 6525 EP, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. luuk.smeekens@radboudumc.nl.
A C VerburgScientific Institute for Quality of Healthcare, Radboud university medical center, Kapittelweg 54, 6525 EP, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Mjm MaasScientific Institute for Quality of Healthcare, Radboud university medical center, Kapittelweg 54, 6525 EP, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
R van HeerdeScientific Institute for Quality of Healthcare, Radboud university medical center, Kapittelweg 54, 6525 EP, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
A van KerkhofLeidsche Rijn Julius Gezondheidscentra, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
P J van der WeesScientific Institute for Quality of Healthcare, Radboud university medical center, Kapittelweg 54, 6525 EP, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Radboud University Nijmegen · NLLeidsche Rijn Julius Health Centers · NLRadboud Institute for Molecular Life Sciences · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis study evaluates the feasibility of a nine-month advanced quality-improvement program aimed at enhancing the quality of care provided by primary care physical therapists in the Netherlands. The evaluation is based on routinely collected health outcomes of patients with nonspecific low back pain, assessing three feasibility domains: (1) appropriateness, feasibility, and acceptability for quality-improvement purposes; (2) impact on clinical performance; and (3) impact on learning and behavioral change.

methodsA mixed-methods quality-improvement study using a concurrent triangulation design was conducted in primary care physical therapist practice. Feedback reports on the processes and outcomes of care, peer assessment, and self-assessment were used in a Plan-Do-Study-Act cycle based on self-selected goals. The program's appropriateness, feasibility, and acceptability, as well as the impact on clinical performance, were evaluated using the Intervention Appropriate Measure, Feasibility Intervention Measure, Acceptability Intervention Measure (for these three measure, possible scores range from 4 to 20), and with a self-assessment of clinical performance (scored 0-10), respectively. The impact on learning and behavioral change was evaluated qualitatively with a directed content analysis.

resultsTen physical therapists from two practices participated in this study. They rated the program with a mean of 16.5 (SD 1.9) for appropriateness, 17.1 (SD 2.2) for feasibility, and 16.4 (SD 1.5) for acceptability. Participants gave their development in clinical performance a mean score of 6.7 (SD 1.8). Participants became aware of the potential value of using outcome data and gained insight into their own routines and motivations. They changed their data collection routines, implemented data in their routine practice, and explored the impact on their clinical behavior.

conclusionsThis explorative study demonstrated that a quality-improvement program, using health outcomes from a national registry, is judged to be feasible. IMPACT STATEMENT: This study provides preliminary evidence on how physical therapists may use health outcomes to improve their quality, which can be further used in initiatives to improve outcome-based care in primary physical therapy.

Indexed as

Feasibility StudiesPrimary Health CareQuality ImprovementAdultFemaleHumansLow Back PainMaleMiddle AgedNetherlandsOutcome Assessment, Health CarePhysical TherapistsProgram EvaluationHealth outcomesNonspecific low back painPhysical therapyQuality improvement

Identifiers

PMID38658939
PMCPMC11040789
OpenAlexW4395081782

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.