Suppr超能文献

一项定性研究:下腰痛的临床决策。

A qualitative study: Clinical decision making in low back pain.

机构信息

Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky 40536-0200, USA.

出版信息

Physiother Theory Pract. 2012 Feb;28(2):95-107. doi: 10.3109/09593985.2011.571752. Epub 2011 Jul 3.

Abstract

Classification systems are available to subgroup patients with acute/nonspecific low back pain (LBP) to determine interventions. The use of classification systems by physical therapists (PT) has little published evidence. The aims of this study were to understand the process PTs use when assessing and determining interventions for patients with acute/nonspecific LBP in outpatient settings and what classification systems, if any, are used in clinical practice. Qualitative methods were used to investigate the decision-making process PTs use when managing patients with LBP. Semi-structured interviews focused on the decision-making process of examination and intervention selection for patients with LBP. Findings were verified through member checking, triangulation, and audit trail. Thirteen PTs were included in the study. Four decision-making preferences emerged from the data: (1) identifying the root cause, (2) eclectic approach, (3) experience-based management, and (4) evidence-based management. Experience, education, and other aspects of the PTs' backgrounds influenced their preferred decision-making style, and use of resources, such as classification systems, varied broadly.

摘要

分类系统可用于对急性/非特异性下腰痛 (LBP) 患者进行亚组分类,以确定干预措施。物理治疗师 (PT) 使用分类系统的证据很少。本研究的目的是了解在门诊环境中评估和确定急性/非特异性 LBP 患者干预措施时 PT 使用的流程,以及在临床实践中使用哪些(如果有的话)分类系统。研究采用定性方法来探究 PT 在管理 LBP 患者时的决策过程。半结构式访谈侧重于 LBP 患者检查和干预选择的决策过程。研究结果通过成员检查、三角测量和审计跟踪进行了验证。本研究纳入了 13 名 PT。研究结果得出了 4 种决策偏好:(1)确定根本原因;(2)折衷方法;(3)基于经验的管理;(4)基于证据的管理。经验、教育和 PT 背景的其他方面影响他们偏爱的决策风格,对分类系统等资源的使用也存在很大差异。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验