ArticlePhysical therapy2025
Patient and Clinician Perceptions of a "People-Like-Me" Tool for Personalized Rehabilitation After Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Qualitative Interview Study.
Article in Physical therapy, 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.
- Implementation of a "People-Like-Me" Tool for Personalized Rehabilitation After Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Mixed Methods Pilot Study.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2025Article
- Evaluation of the implementation of personalised outcomes forecasts to optimise supervised exercise therapy in patients with intermittent claudication: a multimethods process evaluation.BMJ open quality · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe author team developed a decision support tool to help physical therapists address the varied expectations and recoveries of the total knee arthroplasty (TKA) population. The purpose of this study was to explore patients' and clinicians' perceptions and experiences with the tool during rehabilitation after TKA.
methodsThe tool was piloted in 2 outpatient physical therapy clinics. An in-depth semi-structured interview was conducted with patients who underwent TKA and were exposed to the tool during rehabilitation, and with clinicians who used the tool with patients after TKA. Two members of the research team coded the interview data using a descriptive content analysis.
resultsSixteen patients and 10 clinicians were interviewed. Four common themes were identified: (1) expectations: most patients and clinicians felt the tool provided patients with valuable feedback for managing recovery expectations; (2) motivation: patients and clinicians felt the tool motivated patients to participate in rehabilitation by providing positive reinforcement and/or a form of competition; (3) influence on practice: some patients and clinicians indicated that the tool helped guide treatment decisions or provided opportunities for patient education, but most felt it did not influence clinical decision making; and (4) clarity and comprehension: the majority of patients understood the tool's "take-home" message, however, some patients and clinicians felt the use of percentiles, line graphs, and medical jargon decreased patients' clarity and comprehension of the tool.
conclusionsOverall, participants reported that the tool helped to shape patients' expectations for postoperative recovery and increase patient motivation to participate in rehabilitation. Participants had mixed perceptions on how the tool influenced clinical care. Finally, participants identified some limitations in patient comprehension of the tool, which will inform future revisions to the tool to accommodate varying levels of health literacy. IMPACT: A clinical decision support tool that provided individualized projections of TKA recovery was helpful to patients and clinicians during TKA rehabilitation to set expectations and increase patient motivation. Revisions to the tool and how it is implemented may enhance its future utility and potential to impact clinical practice.
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.