ArticleScandinavian journal of primary health care2026
Use of primary care physiotherapy and its associations with clinical and socioeconomic outcomes in musculoskeletal disorders: a cohort study.
Article in Scandinavian journal of primary health care, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo assess how physiotherapy contact frequency relates to clinical outcomes in patients with musculoskeletal disorders across prognostic groups, and how outcomes are associated with future healthcare costs and disability pension. DESIGN AND
settingCohort study linking clinical data from the FYSIOPRIM primary care physiotherapy cohort (12-month follow-up) with national registry data on healthcare use, costs, and socioeconomic factors.
participants1475 patients were included in FYSIOPRIM at baseline, 671 provided data on all covariates and 12-month outcomes and were included in the analysis.
methodComparing low and high physiotherapy use during a 12 month follow-up period (High use: Median or higher (9+ contacts)). Patients were categorized into good, medium, and poor clinical prognosis based on seven baseline clinical factors.
main outcome measuresGlobal Perceived Effect (GPE) at 12 months, high healthcare costs (≥95th percentile two years post-FYSIOPRIM), and disability pension (1-3 years post-FYSIOPRIM).
resultsHigh physiotherapy use was associated with improvement in GPE in patients with poor prognosis (OR 4.04, 95%CI 1.56-10.50) but not for good or medium prognosis. Improvement on GPE was associated with lower odds of high future healthcare costs (OR 0.27, 95%CI 0.13-0.58) and disability pension (OR 0.06, 95%CI 0.01-0.53).
conclusionsPatients with poor prognosis may benefit from more physiotherapy contacts, while those with better prognosis may require fewer contacts. Tailoring treatment intensity to prognosis may support more efficient resource allocation and support long-term societal benefits through reduced healthcare costs and disability risk.
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.