International Expert Consensus on Instrument-Assisted Soft-Tissue Mobilization Precautions and Contraindications: A Modified Delphi Study.

IF 2.4 4区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Scott W Cheatham, Russell T Baker, M Terry Loghmani, Robert Schleip
{"title":"International Expert Consensus on Instrument-Assisted Soft-Tissue Mobilization Precautions and Contraindications: A Modified Delphi Study.","authors":"Scott W Cheatham, Russell T Baker, M Terry Loghmani, Robert Schleip","doi":"10.3390/healthcare13060642","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background</b>: Instrument-assisted soft-tissue mobilization (IASTM) is a popular myofascial intervention used by healthcare professionals. Despite the growing body of research evidence, there is still a gap in understanding what healthcare professionals consider as treatment precautions or contraindications. To date, no consensus on precautions and contraindications has been established among IASTM experts. The purpose of this modified Delphi survey was to determine IASTM precautions and contraindications among international IASTM experts. <b>Methods</b>: A three-round Delphi study of 24 international IASTM experts was conducted. In round 1, experts chose from a list of 81 medical conditions and treatment considerations that could be a concern for IASTM treatment. Consensus was considered if more than 70% of experts agreed on an item. Round 2 included the updated list of 39 items, and the experts decided if each item should be a precaution, contraindication, or both. The <i>strength of agreement grade scale</i> was used to rank the precautions and contraindications, by the level of expert agreement using grades A-D (e.g., A-strong, B-moderate, C-weak, D-both). Grade D conditions could potentially be both a precaution and contraindication. In round 3, the final list of categories and items was presented to the experts for final approval. Results: All recruited experts (<i>n</i> = 24) participated in the three rounds and the final list of items received 100% approval. Contraindications had the highest number of conditions (<i>n</i> = 16) across the strength of agreement grade categories A-C followed by category D (both) (<i>n</i> = 8). <b>Discussion</b>: This Delphi study was the first survey to document expert consensus on precautions and contraindications based upon the strength of agreement. This study offers a beginner's guide for clinicians to safely implement IASTM by establishing required precautions and contraindications through consensus agreement. <b>Conclusions</b>: This survey should be the first step in a series of planned IASTM studies on precautions and contraindications to establish the best-practice recommendations for the application of IASTM in clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":12977,"journal":{"name":"Healthcare","volume":"13 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11941819/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Healthcare","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare13060642","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Instrument-assisted soft-tissue mobilization (IASTM) is a popular myofascial intervention used by healthcare professionals. Despite the growing body of research evidence, there is still a gap in understanding what healthcare professionals consider as treatment precautions or contraindications. To date, no consensus on precautions and contraindications has been established among IASTM experts. The purpose of this modified Delphi survey was to determine IASTM precautions and contraindications among international IASTM experts. Methods: A three-round Delphi study of 24 international IASTM experts was conducted. In round 1, experts chose from a list of 81 medical conditions and treatment considerations that could be a concern for IASTM treatment. Consensus was considered if more than 70% of experts agreed on an item. Round 2 included the updated list of 39 items, and the experts decided if each item should be a precaution, contraindication, or both. The strength of agreement grade scale was used to rank the precautions and contraindications, by the level of expert agreement using grades A-D (e.g., A-strong, B-moderate, C-weak, D-both). Grade D conditions could potentially be both a precaution and contraindication. In round 3, the final list of categories and items was presented to the experts for final approval. Results: All recruited experts (n = 24) participated in the three rounds and the final list of items received 100% approval. Contraindications had the highest number of conditions (n = 16) across the strength of agreement grade categories A-C followed by category D (both) (n = 8). Discussion: This Delphi study was the first survey to document expert consensus on precautions and contraindications based upon the strength of agreement. This study offers a beginner's guide for clinicians to safely implement IASTM by establishing required precautions and contraindications through consensus agreement. Conclusions: This survey should be the first step in a series of planned IASTM studies on precautions and contraindications to establish the best-practice recommendations for the application of IASTM in clinical practice.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Healthcare
Healthcare Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
7.10%
发文量
0
审稿时长
47 days
期刊介绍: Healthcare (ISSN 2227-9032) is an international, peer-reviewed, open access journal (free for readers), which publishes original theoretical and empirical work in the interdisciplinary area of all aspects of medicine and health care research. Healthcare publishes Original Research Articles, Reviews, Case Reports, Research Notes and Short Communications. We encourage researchers to publish their experimental and theoretical results in as much detail as possible. For theoretical papers, full details of proofs must be provided so that the results can be checked; for experimental papers, full experimental details must be provided so that the results can be reproduced. Additionally, electronic files or software regarding the full details of the calculations, experimental procedure, etc., can be deposited along with the publication as “Supplementary Material”.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信