Professional Change and Identity in Contemporary Physiotherapy: A Six-Domain Conceptual Framework.

IF 1.7 Q3 REHABILITATION
Dimitrios Stasinopoulos
{"title":"Professional Change and Identity in Contemporary Physiotherapy: A Six-Domain Conceptual Framework.","authors":"Dimitrios Stasinopoulos","doi":"10.1002/pri.70367","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and purpose: </strong>Contemporary physiotherapy is often described as evidence-informed, person-centered, and biopsychosocial. These descriptions can imply a break with earlier practice, although some commitments have longer histories. This paper proposes a framework for examining professional change and its implications for professional identity.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This single-author conceptual analysis draws on a purposive reading of historical, sociological, critical, and professional literature. The professional maturation hypothesis is a working proposition: change may strengthen an enduring commitment or alter a foundational assumption. Contrasting examples inform six provisional domains; we did not conduct a systematic review or empirical validation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The domains are understanding of the body and health, knowledge, professional role, therapeutic relationships, therapeutic purpose, and organization of care. Within each domain, the framework distinguishes maturation (better evidence or enactment), consolidation (institutional support), rebranding (new language without demonstrated substantive change), and rupture (a consequential shift in foundational assumptions). These interpretations may coexist.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The framework helps clinicians, educators, researchers, and professional organizations assess what has changed, where, to what extent, and with what consequences. Its intended use is context-specific reflection and cross-national inquiry, not classification of countries along a universal trajectory. The framework remains provisional and unvalidated.</p>","PeriodicalId":47243,"journal":{"name":"Physiotherapy Research International","volume":"31 4","pages":"e70367"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13670981/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physiotherapy Research International","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pri.70367","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and purpose: Contemporary physiotherapy is often described as evidence-informed, person-centered, and biopsychosocial. These descriptions can imply a break with earlier practice, although some commitments have longer histories. This paper proposes a framework for examining professional change and its implications for professional identity.

Methods: This single-author conceptual analysis draws on a purposive reading of historical, sociological, critical, and professional literature. The professional maturation hypothesis is a working proposition: change may strengthen an enduring commitment or alter a foundational assumption. Contrasting examples inform six provisional domains; we did not conduct a systematic review or empirical validation.

Results: The domains are understanding of the body and health, knowledge, professional role, therapeutic relationships, therapeutic purpose, and organization of care. Within each domain, the framework distinguishes maturation (better evidence or enactment), consolidation (institutional support), rebranding (new language without demonstrated substantive change), and rupture (a consequential shift in foundational assumptions). These interpretations may coexist.

Discussion: The framework helps clinicians, educators, researchers, and professional organizations assess what has changed, where, to what extent, and with what consequences. Its intended use is context-specific reflection and cross-national inquiry, not classification of countries along a universal trajectory. The framework remains provisional and unvalidated.

当代物理治疗的职业变化与身份认同:一个六域概念框架。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
5.90%
发文量
53
期刊介绍: Physiotherapy Research International is an international peer reviewed journal dedicated to the exchange of knowledge that is directly relevant to specialist areas of physiotherapy theory, practice, and research. Our aim is to promote a high level of scholarship and build on the current evidence base to inform the advancement of the physiotherapy profession. We publish original research on a wide range of topics e.g. Primary research testing new physiotherapy treatments; methodological research; measurement and outcome research and qualitative research of interest to researchers, clinicians and educators. Further, we aim to publish high quality papers that represent the range of cultures and settings where physiotherapy services are delivered. We attract a wide readership from physiotherapists and others working in diverse clinical and academic settings. We aim to promote an international debate amongst the profession about current best evidence based practice. Papers are directed primarily towards the physiotherapy profession, but can be relevant to a wide range of professional groups. The growth of interdisciplinary research is also key to our aims and scope, and we encourage relevant submissions from other professional groups. The journal actively encourages submissions which utilise a breadth of different methodologies and research designs to facilitate addressing key questions related to the physiotherapy practice. PRI seeks to encourage good quality topical debates on a range of relevant issues and promote critical reflection on decision making and implementation of physiotherapy interventions.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书