ArticlePloS one2025
Experiences, views and perceptions of recovery following musculoskeletal trauma of patients and physiotherapists: a qualitative study.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this qualitative phenomenology study using two methods (semi-structured interviews, focus groups), was to explore patients' and physiotherapists' views and perceptions of recovery, and what constitutes successful recovery following musculoskeletal trauma within the early stages of recovery. Participants were recruited from one major trauma centre in the United Kingdom and data collected via Microsoft Teams, or via a telephone call. Inclusion criteria for patient interviews: purposive sample of adults (≥18 years) who sustained a traumatic musculoskeletal injury, admitted as an inpatient within 4 weeks of injury, mental capacity, and able to communicate in English. Purposive sampling included age, gender, and injury characteristics. Focus group inclusion criteria: physiotherapists with experience managing patients with musculoskeletal trauma. Interviews and focus groups were informed by an evidenced based topic guide, audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Trustworthiness of the data was strengthened using multiple strategies, e.g., member checking. Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis was used for the patient interviews and the Kreuger Framework for the focus groups. Participants included 17 patient interviews and 10 physiotherapists in two focus groups. Three themes emerged from patient interviews: understanding and impact of the accident and injuries, the early stages of recovery and physiotherapy, and healthcare and setting influences. Eight themes emerged from the focus groups: process of recovery, what is being fully recovered, it's more than just communicating with the patient, psychological impact of trauma affecting recovery, system influences/resources for recovery, influencers to recovery, barriers to using patient reported outcome measures to evaluate recovery, and what actually is useful to measure in trauma? Recovery following musculoskeletal trauma is complex, individual and focused on returning to 'normal'. Similarities across patient and physiotherapist views of recovery exist. Differences between participant groups were evident, centred on communication and what is important to the patient in their recovery.
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.