Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39078682›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2024

Evaluation of a Musculoskeletal Digital Assessment Routing Tool (DART): Crossover Noninferiority Randomized Pilot Trial.

Cabella Lowe, Ruth Sephton, William Marsh, Dylan Morrissey

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04904029 (Validation and Implementation of a Digital Assessment Routing Tool), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT04904029 nacompletednot on this map

Validation and Implementation of a Digital Assessment Routing Tool (DART) as an Alternative to Physiotherapy-led Remote Triage for Musculoskeletal Disorders: Protocol for a Pilot Randomised Crossover Non-inferiority Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorQueen Mary University of LondonRan2022 to 2022Enrolled78ConditionsMusculoskeletal Diseases or ConditionsArmsDigital Assessment Routing Tool [DART], Physiotherapy-led remote triage (usual care)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. 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

4 authors.

Cabella LoweCentre for Sports & Exercise Medicine, William Harvey Research Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1168-8731
Ruth SephtonSt Helens Musculoskeletal Physiotherapy Service, Mersey Care NHS Foundation Services, St Helens, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6958-6669
William MarshMachine Intelligence and Decision Support [MInDS] Research Group, School of Electronic Engineering and Computer Science and Digital Environment Research Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0212-6363
Dylan MorrisseyCentre for Sports & Exercise Medicine, William Harvey Research Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7045-3644

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMusculoskeletal conditions account for 16% of global disability, resulting in a negative effect on patients and increasing demand for health care use. Triage directing patients to appropriate level intervention improving health outcomes and efficiency has been prioritized. We developed a musculoskeletal digital assessment routing tool (DART) mobile health (mHealth) system, which requires evaluation prior to implementation. Such innovations are rarely rigorously tested in clinical trials-considered the gold standard for evaluating safety and efficacy. This pilot study is a precursor to a trial assessing DART performance with a physiotherapist-led triage assessment.

objectiveThe study aims to evaluate trial design, assess procedures, and collect exploratory data to establish the feasibility of delivering an adequately powered, definitive randomized trial, assessing DART safety and efficacy in an NHS primary care setting.

methodsA crossover, noninferiority pilot trial using an integrated knowledge translation approach within a National Health Service England primary care setting. Participants were patients seeking assessment for a musculoskeletal condition, completing a DART assessment and the history-taking element of a face-to-face physiotherapist-led triage in a randomized order. The primary outcome was agreement between DART and physiotherapist triage recommendation. Data allowed analysis of participant recruitment and retention, randomization, blinding, study burden, and potential barriers to intervention delivery. Participant satisfaction was measured using the System Usability Scale.

resultsOver 8 weeks, 129 patients were invited to participate. Of these, 92% (119/129) proceeded to eligibility assessment, with 60% (78/129) meeting the inclusion criteria and being randomized into each intervention arm (39/39). There were no dropouts and data were analyzed for all 78 participants. Agreement between physiotherapist and DART across all participants and all primary triage outcomes was 41% (32/78; 95% CI 22-45), intraclass correlation coefficient 0.37 (95% CI 0.16-0.55), indicating that the reliability of DART was poor to moderate. Feedback from the clinical service team led to an adjusted analysis yielding of 78% (61/78; 95% CI 47-78) and an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.57 (95% CI 0.40-0.70). Participant satisfaction was measured quantitively using amalgamated System Usability Scale scores (n=78; mean score 84.0; 90% CI +2.94 to -2.94), equating to an "excellent" system. There were no study incidents, and the trial burden was acceptable.

conclusionsPhysiotherapist-DART agreement of 78%, with no adverse triage decisions and high patient satisfaction, was sufficient to conclude DART had the potential to improve the musculoskeletal pathway. Study validity was enhanced by the recruitment of real-world patients and using an integrated knowledge translation approach. Completion of a context-specific consensus process is recommended to provide definitive definitions of safety criteria, range of appropriateness, noninferiority margin, and sample size. This pilot demonstrated an adequately powered definitive trial is feasible, which would provide evidence of DART safety and efficacy, ultimately informing potential for DART implementation.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04904029; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04904029. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/31541.

Indexed as

acceptabilityassessassessmentcrossoverdigital healthdigital technologydigital triageeHealthmHealthmusculoskeletalphysiotherapyphysiotherapy triageprimary carerandomized controlled trialreferralstriagetriagingusabilityvalidation

Identifiers

PMID39078682
PMCPMC11322692

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.