ArticleBMJ open quality2024
Implementing group consultations in a lower limb musculoskeletal outpatient service to improve efficiency and maintain positive patient outcomes.
Article in BMJ open quality, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGroup consultations (GCs) in healthcare have been shown to improve clinical outcomes with greater efficiency. This project aimed to develop a more efficient musculoskeletal (MSK) physiotherapy-led GC approach for common lower limb problems. This was to help manage an anticipated increase in demand while maintaining high patient satisfaction and ensuring clinical effectiveness.
methodsThree 'Plan-Do-Study-Act' (PDSA) cycles were undertaken to test out the new approach of virtual group consultations (VGCs) and face-to-face GCs with MSK patients. These two approaches were tested and refined on four common lower limb conditions: patellofemoral pain syndrome, Achilles tendinopathy, plantar fasciopathy and knee osteoarthritis. We measured the number of patients seen, staff time, patients' experience and patient outcome scores.
resultsEach patient used 45 min of physiotherapy time via the traditional one-to-one physiotherapy consultation approach, this was reduced to 22 min in the VGCs and 12 min for the face-to-face GCs. We found a significant increase in EQ-5D scores (PDSA 1: +0.19, p=0.004 and PDSA 2: +0.17, p=0.002) and the Visual Analogue Score for Pain (PDSA 1: -1.95, p=0.001 and PDSA 2: -2.6, p=0.007) from the first to the second virtual GC sessions.
conclusionGCs were shown to be an efficient way of providing physiotherapy to patients with lower limb conditions. Feedback from patients attending GCs has shown a good level of effectiveness and patient satisfaction. This alternative way to review and treat patients has yielded a reduction in physiotherapist contact time per patient, improving the efficiency of our MSK service. We did not compare these groups to the one-to-one face-to-face consultations, therefore whether they are better, is unknown.
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.