Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40980336›Full record

ArticleShoulder & elbow2026

A service evaluation of a newly implemented Advanced Physiotherapy Practitioner led shoulder instability service.

Amy Banning, Catharine Sian Macrae, Elizabeth Ratcliffe, Dana Maki

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Shoulder & elbow, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Amy BanningDepartment of Physiotherapy, Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-8477-4227
Catharine Sian MacraeDepartment of Physiotherapy, Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2060-670X
Elizabeth RatcliffeDepartment of Physiotherapy, Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Dana MakiBrunel University London, Uxbridge, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The National Health Service (NHS) faces restricted capacity for first reviews of orthopaedic patients. Advanced Physiotherapy Practitioners (APP) offer an effective alternative to doctor consultations, potentially increasing capacity and promoting efficient use of resources. A new APP-led service for shoulder instability was established on this basis, aiming to promote adherence to recommended care pathways, and increase patient satisfaction. This service evaluation assesses the APP service. Methods included comparing data from the same 6-month period in consecutive years. Wait times from A&E to the first appointment and adherence to care pathways were measured. Process mapping was conducted. Patient satisfaction was measured and thematically analysed qualitatively. Results demonstrated reduction in wait times by 6 days in the APP led service, with 100% patient satisfaction. Adherence to the care pathway improved; all patients under the age of 25 received appointments within 6 weeks, and early imaging referrals increased by 40%. In conclusion, the APP-led service decreased wait time and enhanced adherence to care recommendations, with high patient satisfaction. This supports the use of physiotherapists in delivering care in this cohort of patients. Future service improvements could focus on raising awareness of referral processes to maximise service use.

Indexed as

advanced clinical practitioneradvanced physiotherapy practitionerorthopaedicsrotator cuffservice evaluationshoulder instability

Identifiers

PMID40980336
PMCPMC12443728

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.