ArticleImplementation science communications2025
Can a tailored implementation programme enhance the adoption of guideline-adherent behaviour in physiotherapists and chiropractors managing patients with low back pain? An implementation study.
Article in Implementation science communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundLow back pain (LBP) is the primary contributor to disability worldwide, leading to a significant healthcare burden. Implementing evidence-based practice (EBP) can reduce this burden, as healthcare professionals (HCPs) working evidence-based reduce the number of treatments, the use of imaging and medication compared to HCPs not working evidence-based. Clinical practice guidelines have been published to help HCPs implement research evidence into practice. Unfortunately, studies have consistently shown a lack of adherence to guidelines in LBP care. This study aimed to investigate the implementation outcomes of a tailored programme for implementing key recommendations from LBP guidelines among Danish physiotherapists and chiropractors working in primary care.
methodsThis study was conducted as a 'pre-post' implementation study among 80 physiotherapists and chiropractors from 15 primary care clinics. The implementation object was the two key guideline recommendations: 1) screening of psychosocial risk factors and 2) patient education, including reassuring information. The programme comprised multipronged strategies and was designed as a step-by-step implementation process comprising 16 hours of activities distributed over 16 weeks. Adoption was measured as changes in self-reported behaviour and perceptions of the professional role and culture from baseline to follow-up at 16 weeks. Acceptability and appropriateness of the programme were measured weekly using a four-point Likert scale. Feasibility was measured at 16-week follow-up using a five-point Likert scale. Fidelity was measured as the number of strategies and implementation support delivered as planned and registered by the research team.
resultsAn increase in the adoption of screening of psychosocial factors and offering patient education, including reassuring information, was seen in 38% and 33% of participants, respectively. Most participants reported that the programme was partly or overall acceptable and appropriate. The feasibility of the implementation programme was assessed as moderate to high, and the fidelity of the implementation programme was determined as high.
conclusionThe tailored implementation programme enhanced the adoption of the guidelines and changed the participants' professional identity and culture. Most participants found the programme partly or overall acceptable and appropriate. The programme was feasible, but the perspective requires refinements, as most participants rated it moderately feasible.
trial registrationCentral Denmark Region, Registered November 11, 2021, act no. 1-16-02-93-19.
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.