Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41129811›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2025

Feasibility of Physical Therapy Evaluation Symptom Provocation Tests in Older Adults With Mild Traumatic Brain Injury: Mixed Methods Study.

Carrie A Barrett, Mark G Goetting, Alessander Danna-Dos-Santos

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

3 authors.

Carrie A Barrett *Department of Physical Therapy, College of Health and Human Services, Western Michigan University, 1903 W. Michigan Ave., Kalamazoo, MI, 49008, United States, 1 2693878369.ORCID 0000-0002-1683-3133
Mark G Goetting *Department of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, Western Michigan University Homer Stryker School of Medicine, Kalamazoo, MI, United States.ORCID 0009-0004-5404-3206
Alessander Danna-Dos-Santos *Department of Physical Therapy, College of Health and Human Services, Western Michigan University, 1903 W. Michigan Ave., Kalamazoo, MI, 49008, United States, 1 2693878369.ORCID 0000-0003-0070-1205

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Early standard assessment protocols have decreased costs and better identified treatment strategies in individuals with mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI). Clinical practice guidelines contained strong recommendations for the use of provocation tests in evaluating younger adults (<65 y of age). Currently, the recommended protocols and literature regarding tolerance to self-reported and physical exertion outcome testing in older adults (>65 y of age) with mTBI have been limited. To start bridging some of these shortcomings and aid the development of practice guidelines for older adults, this study explored the feasibility of physical therapy evaluation protocols for individuals aged >65 years. Objective: The study aimed to (1) assess the feasibility and tolerance of using evidence-based physical therapy evaluation outcome tests, and (2) apply the International Classification of Health, Disability, and Function (ICF) domains to an emergent thematic analysis of research protocols involving older adults with and without mTBI. Methods: The feasibility study was a mixed methods design that included 13 community participants (>65 y) with and without mTBI. Investigators documented completion of the health form, participant-reported outcomes including the Patient-Specific Function Scale (PSFS) and Post Concussion Symptom Scale, and physical performance measures using the Motion Sensitivity Quotient (MSQ) and a submaximal recumbent stepper test, modified from the Buffalo Concussion Bike Test. Emergent contextual themes were identified within the study protocol, testing space, and participant responses. Results: The sample included 13 participants (aged 65-91 y; 7 females, 6 males), 4 with mTBI and 9 without mTBI. All completed the health form, PSFS, and Post Concussion Symptom Scale, with moderate verbal cues required in 15% (PSFS) of the cases. The Motion Sensitivity Quotient and Buffalo Concussion Bike Test-Modified were completed to the participants' maximum safe effort. No participants experienced adverse mTBI symptoms. The categories for the theme of study protocol were time, communication, and logistics coordination. The categories for the theme of study environment were assessment, documentation, and safety. Unanticipated positive emotions were evoked with comments such as feedback, including participation was "fun" and "I didn't know I could do all this." Conclusions: Older adults were able to tolerate the collection of participant-reported and physical outcome measures that allowed for individual maximal safe efforts without mTBI symptom provocation. The contextual themes using the ICF model of study protocol and environment were categorized and coded for future research consideration. Positive emotion participant responses were captured at the end of data collection. Clinical Relevance: This study applied standard physical therapy assessment protocols, which were safely tolerated by older adults with mTBI. The study used ICF domains from a research procedure perspective for protocol and environment considerations. The findings included participants' positive emoted responses, which may inform future large-sample trials in the evaluation of older adults with mTBI.

Indexed as

Brain ConcussionPhysical Therapy ModalitiesAgedAged, 80 and overDisability EvaluationFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansMaleconcussiongeriatricmild traumatic brain injuryolder adultsphysical therapy evaluationsymptom provocation tests

Identifiers

PMID41129811
PMCPMC12548967

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.