The utilisation and attitudes to patient reported outcome measures by Australian osteopaths: A cross sectional study

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Michael Fleischmann , Gary Fryer
{"title":"The utilisation and attitudes to patient reported outcome measures by Australian osteopaths: A cross sectional study","authors":"Michael Fleischmann ,&nbsp;Gary Fryer","doi":"10.1016/j.ijosm.2022.07.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p><span>Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) provide information on patients’ views of their symptoms, functional status, health related quality of life and are an important part of evidence-informed practice and patient-centred care. The utilisation of and attitudes to PROMs by Australian </span>osteopaths is unknown.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>An online survey was designed to investigate the self-reported utilisation of PROMs by Australian osteopaths, including the frequency of use, the types of PROMs used, the features of PROMs are most useful, the attitudes towards PROMs, and the barriers and enablers for use of PROMs. The survey was a 14-item questionnaire that used a 5-point Likert scale or required free text answers. The effect of gender and years in practice was analysed using Mann-Whitney U tests. Effect sizes were calculated where possible.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>166 (male = 69, female = 97) osteopaths participated in the survey. Nearly half (47.6%) reported that pain scales were used ‘frequently’ or ‘always’, but there was less frequent use of PROMs other than pain scales (14.2%), except for third party paying patients (57.4%). Australian osteopaths reported using PROMs most frequently for patients with neck pain (31%) and low back pain (29%). The majority agreed PROMs were important for tracking improvement in patients (61%). The greatest barrier identified by osteopaths was the burden on consultation time.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>This study highlighted only the minority of Australian osteopaths use PROMs frequently and consider them important. Professional organisations should consider professional development aimed to upskill and support practitioners in the efficient use of PROMs in practice.</p></div><div><h3>Implications for clinical practice</h3><p></p><ul><li><span>•</span><span><p>Nearly half (47.6%) of 166 osteopaths reported using pain scales ‘frequently’ or ‘always’, but there was a less frequent use of PROMs other than pain scales (14.2%), except for third party paying patients (57.4%).</p></span></li><li><span>•</span><span><p>The majority of osteopaths agreed that PROMs were important for tracking clinical improvement in patients (61%), although only 48% agreed that PROMs were important in osteopathic practice.</p></span></li><li><span>•</span><span><p>The greatest barrier identified by osteopaths to using PROMs was the burden on consultation time and most common enabler was the requirement of PROMs by third party payers.</p></span></li></ul></div>","PeriodicalId":51068,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Osteopathic Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Osteopathic Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1746068922000669","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) provide information on patients’ views of their symptoms, functional status, health related quality of life and are an important part of evidence-informed practice and patient-centred care. The utilisation of and attitudes to PROMs by Australian osteopaths is unknown.

Methods

An online survey was designed to investigate the self-reported utilisation of PROMs by Australian osteopaths, including the frequency of use, the types of PROMs used, the features of PROMs are most useful, the attitudes towards PROMs, and the barriers and enablers for use of PROMs. The survey was a 14-item questionnaire that used a 5-point Likert scale or required free text answers. The effect of gender and years in practice was analysed using Mann-Whitney U tests. Effect sizes were calculated where possible.

Results

166 (male = 69, female = 97) osteopaths participated in the survey. Nearly half (47.6%) reported that pain scales were used ‘frequently’ or ‘always’, but there was less frequent use of PROMs other than pain scales (14.2%), except for third party paying patients (57.4%). Australian osteopaths reported using PROMs most frequently for patients with neck pain (31%) and low back pain (29%). The majority agreed PROMs were important for tracking improvement in patients (61%). The greatest barrier identified by osteopaths was the burden on consultation time.

Conclusion

This study highlighted only the minority of Australian osteopaths use PROMs frequently and consider them important. Professional organisations should consider professional development aimed to upskill and support practitioners in the efficient use of PROMs in practice.

Implications for clinical practice

  • Nearly half (47.6%) of 166 osteopaths reported using pain scales ‘frequently’ or ‘always’, but there was a less frequent use of PROMs other than pain scales (14.2%), except for third party paying patients (57.4%).

  • The majority of osteopaths agreed that PROMs were important for tracking clinical improvement in patients (61%), although only 48% agreed that PROMs were important in osteopathic practice.

  • The greatest barrier identified by osteopaths to using PROMs was the burden on consultation time and most common enabler was the requirement of PROMs by third party payers.

澳大利亚整骨医生对患者报告结果的利用和态度:一项横断面研究
目的患者报告的结果测量(PROMs)提供了患者对其症状、功能状态、健康相关生活质量的看法,是循证实践和以患者为中心的护理的重要组成部分。澳大利亚整骨医生对PROMs的使用和态度尚不清楚。方法设计一项在线调查,调查澳大利亚整骨医生自我报告的PROMs使用情况,包括使用频率、使用的PROMs类型、PROMs最有用的特征、对PROMs的态度以及使用PROMs的障碍和促进因素。该调查是一份包含14个项目的问卷,使用5分李克特量表或要求免费文本回答。使用Mann-Whitney U检验分析了性别和实践年限的影响。在可能的情况下计算了效应值。结果共166名整骨医师参与调查,其中男69名,女97名。近一半(47.6%)的患者报告疼痛量表“经常”或“总是”使用,但除了第三方付费患者(57.4%)外,使用疼痛量表的频率较低(14.2%)。澳大利亚的整骨医生报告称,最常使用PROMs治疗颈部疼痛(31%)和腰痛(29%)的患者。大多数人(61%)同意PROMs对跟踪患者的改善很重要。骨科医生认为最大的障碍是咨询时间的负担。结论本研究表明,只有少数澳大利亚整骨医生经常使用PROMs,并认为它们很重要。专业机构应考虑专业发展,旨在提高技能和支持从业人员在实践中有效地使用PROMs。对临床实践的影响•166名整骨医生中近一半(47.6%)报告“经常”或“总是”使用疼痛量表,但除了第三方付费患者(57.4%)外,使用PROMs的频率较低(14.2%)。•尽管只有48%的整骨医生认为PROMs在整骨治疗实践中很重要,但大多数整骨医生认为PROMs对于跟踪患者的临床改善很重要(61%)。•骨科医生认为使用PROMs的最大障碍是咨询时间的负担,而最常见的促成因素是第三方付款人对PROMs的要求。
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
2.20
自引率
36.80%
发文量
42
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Osteopathic Medicine is a peer-reviewed journal that provides for the publication of high quality research articles and review papers that are as broad as the many disciplines that influence and underpin the principles and practice of osteopathic medicine. Particular emphasis is given to basic science research, clinical epidemiology and health social science in relation to osteopathy and neuromusculoskeletal medicine. The Editorial Board encourages submission of articles based on both quantitative and qualitative research designs. The Editorial Board also aims to provide a forum for discourse and debate on any aspect of osteopathy and neuromusculoskeletal medicine with the aim of critically evaluating existing practices in regard to the diagnosis, treatment and management of patients with neuromusculoskeletal disorders and somatic dysfunction. All manuscripts submitted to the IJOM are subject to a blinded review process. The categories currently available for publication include reports of original research, review papers, commentaries and articles related to clinical practice, including case reports. Further details can be found in the IJOM Instructions for Authors. Manuscripts are accepted for publication with the understanding that no substantial part has been, or will be published elsewhere.
×
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