ArticleHealth science reports2025
Exploration of Rapid Adaptation of First Contact Physiotherapy Services During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Three-Phase Sequential Mixed-Methods Study Protocol.
Article in Health science reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
- Rapid adaptation of first contact physiotherapy services for musculoskeletal patients in the UK and Australia during the COVID-19 pandemic: A multiple case study.Journal of health services research & policy · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic significantly disrupted primary care and emergency departments globally, including the UK and Australia respectively, affecting services within these settings, such as first contact physiotherapy services (FCPS) for patients with musculoskeletal conditions. This disruption necessitated rapid adaptation to ensure continuity of care. Before this study, comprehensive adaptations across both primary care and emergency departments FCPS had not been documented. Additionally, the specific adaptation processes, strategies used, and experiences of both staff and patients during the COVID-19 pandemic were unclear. Variations in responses between the UK and Australia also remained unknown. Documenting these rapid adaptations and experiences is crucial for future preparedness, as it provides valuable insights to guide FCPS and similar services, preventing future disruptions and promoting continuity of care. Moreover, findings will contribute significant knowledge to the existing literature. Aim: This study explores rapid adaptation of FCPS for patients with musculoskeletal conditions during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK and Australia. Methods: This is an ongoing three-phase sequential mixed-methods study. Phase 1 utilises a cross-sectional survey of physiotherapists in FCPS role in the UK and Australia to assess changes in healthcare delivery during the pandemic, as well as levels of readiness and responsiveness, highlighting similarities and differences. Phase 2 employs a case-study approach, including semi-structured interviews and a review of documents produced to direct the management and implementation of proposed changes in FCPS, to further understand the findings from Phase 1. In phase 3, mixed-methods integration facilitates the development of context specific recommendations for the rapid adaptation of FCPS and similar contexts. These recommendations will be presented to experts for feedback and further refinement. Discussion: The mixed-methods research will provide contextually rich account of FCPS rapid adaptation, providing key learnings that could be applied to implement evidence-informed rapid adaptation in FCPS during public health emergencies.
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.