Mikhail Christine, Korner-Bitensky Nicol, Rossignol Michel, Dumas Jean-Pierre
Faculty of Medicine, School of Physical and Occupational Therapy, McGill University, 3630 Promenade Sir William Osler, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H3G 1Y5.
Phys Ther. 2005 Nov;85(11):1151-67.
Evidence-based practice aims to improve patient care and service delivery, particularly in the management of individuals with low back pain (LBP), the largest client group seen by outpatient physical therapists. The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence of use of interventions with evidence of effectiveness in the management of acute nonspecific LBP by physical therapists.
A multicenter cross-sectional study was conducted on 100 physical therapists working with patients with LBP.
Using a telephone-administered interview, therapists described their current and desired treatment practices for a typical case of LBP. Each intervention reported was coded according to its evidence of effectiveness (strong, moderate, limited, or none). Information on clinician, workplace, and client characteristics also was obtained.
The prevalence of use of interventions with strong or moderate evidence of effectiveness was 68%. However, 90% to 96% of therapists also used interventions for which research evidence was limited or absent. Users of interventions with high evidence of effectiveness, as compared with nonusers, had graduated more recently and had taken a higher number of postgraduate clinical courses.
Although most therapists use interventions with high evidence of effectiveness, much of their patient time is spent on interventions that are not well reported in the literature. The results indicate the need for improvement in the quality of clinical research as well as its dissemination and implementation in a way that is appealing to therapists, such as through practice-related courses.
循证实践旨在改善患者护理和服务提供,尤其是在腰痛(LBP)患者的管理方面,腰痛患者是门诊物理治疗师接待的最大客户群体。本研究的目的是确定物理治疗师在管理急性非特异性腰痛时使用有疗效证据的干预措施的比例。
对100名治疗腰痛患者的物理治疗师进行了一项多中心横断面研究。
通过电话访谈,治疗师描述了他们对典型腰痛病例当前和期望的治疗方法。所报告的每项干预措施都根据其疗效证据(强、中、有限或无)进行编码。还获取了有关临床医生、工作场所和患者特征的信息。
使用有强或中等疗效证据的干预措施的比例为68%。然而,90%至96%的治疗师也使用了研究证据有限或缺乏的干预措施。与未使用者相比,使用有高疗效证据干预措施的使用者毕业时间更近,且参加的研究生临床课程更多。
尽管大多数治疗师使用有高疗效证据的干预措施,但他们将大量患者治疗时间花在了文献中报道较少的干预措施上。结果表明需要提高临床研究的质量,以及以吸引治疗师的方式进行传播和实施,例如通过与实践相关的课程。