Salisbury Chris, Foster Nadine E, Bishop Annette, Calnan Michael, Coast Jo, Hall Jeanette, Hay Elaine, Hollinghurst Sandra, Hopper Cherida, Grove Sean, Kaur Surinder, Montgomery Alan
Academic Unit of Primary Health Care, Department of Community Based Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 2AA, UK.
BMC Health Serv Res. 2009 Aug 3;9:136. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-9-136.
Providing timely access to physiotherapy has long been a problem for the National Health Service in the United Kingdom. In an attempt to improve access some physiotherapy services have introduced a new treatment pathway known as PhysioDirect. Physiotherapists offer initial assessment and advice by telephone, supported by computerised algorithms, and patients are sent written self-management and exercise advice by post. They are invited for face-to-face treatment only when necessary. Although several such services have been developed, there is no robust evidence regarding clinical and cost-effectiveness, nor the acceptability of PhysioDirect.
METHODS/DESIGN: This protocol describes a multi-centre pragmatic individually randomised trial, with nested qualitative research. The aim is to determine the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and acceptability of PhysioDirect compared with usual models of physiotherapy based on patients going onto a waiting list and receiving face-to-face care. PhysioDirect services will be established in four areas in England. Adult patients in these areas with musculoskeletal problems who refer themselves or are referred by a primary care practitioner for physiotherapy will be invited to participate in the trial. About 1875 consenting patients will be randomised in a 2:1 ratio to PhysioDirect or usual care. Data about outcome measures will be collected at baseline and 6 weeks and 6 months after randomisation. The primary outcome is clinical improvement at 6 months; secondary outcomes include cost, waiting times, time lost from work and usual activities, patient satisfaction and preference. The impact of PhysioDirect on patients in different age-groups and with different conditions will also be examined.Incremental cost-effectiveness will be assessed in terms of quality adjusted life years in relation to cost.Qualitative methods will be used to explore factors associated with the success or failure of the service, the acceptability of PhysioDirect to patients and staff, and ways in which the service could be improved.
It is still relatively unusual to evaluate new forms of service delivery using randomised controlled trials. By combining rigorous trial methods with economic analysis of cost-effectiveness and qualitative research this study will provide robust evidence to inform decisions about the widespread introduction of PhysioDirect services.
Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN55666618.
长期以来,英国国民医疗服务体系一直存在难以及时提供物理治疗服务的问题。为了改善服务可及性,一些物理治疗服务引入了一种名为“直接物理治疗”(PhysioDirect)的新治疗途径。物理治疗师在计算机算法的支持下通过电话提供初步评估和建议,并通过邮寄向患者发送书面自我管理和锻炼建议。仅在必要时才邀请患者进行面对面治疗。尽管已经开发了几项此类服务,但尚无关于临床和成本效益以及“直接物理治疗”可接受性的有力证据。
方法/设计:本方案描述了一项多中心实用型个体随机试验,并嵌套定性研究。目的是确定与基于患者进入等候名单并接受面对面护理的传统物理治疗模式相比,“直接物理治疗”的有效性、成本效益和可接受性。将在英格兰的四个地区建立“直接物理治疗”服务。这些地区患有肌肉骨骼问题且自行转诊或由初级保健医生转诊接受物理治疗的成年患者将被邀请参加试验。约1875名同意参与的患者将按2:1的比例随机分配至“直接物理治疗”组或常规护理组。将在基线、随机分组后6周和6个月收集有关结局指标的数据。主要结局是6个月时的临床改善情况;次要结局包括成本、等候时间、工作和日常活动损失的时间、患者满意度和偏好。还将研究“直接物理治疗”对不同年龄组和不同病情患者的影响。将根据与成本相关的质量调整生命年评估增量成本效益。将使用定性方法探索与该服务成功或失败相关的因素、“直接物理治疗”对患者和工作人员的可接受性以及改善该服务的方法。
使用随机对照试验评估新的服务提供形式仍然相对少见。通过将严格的试验方法与成本效益的经济分析和定性研究相结合,本研究将提供有力证据,为有关广泛引入“直接物理治疗”服务的决策提供参考。
当前受控试验ISRCTN55666618。