Suppr超能文献

澳大利亚养老院中物理治疗的类型和范围未得到充分利用:对物理治疗师的全国性横断面调查。

The type and scope of physiotherapy is under-utilised in Australian residential aged care facilities: a national, cross-sectional survey of physiotherapists.

机构信息

Department of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Health and Human Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, 2109, Australia.

Physiotherapy Department, Prince of Wales Hospital, 320-346 Barker Street, Randwick, NSW, 2031, Australia.

出版信息

BMC Geriatr. 2022 Jul 28;22(1):625. doi: 10.1186/s12877-022-03248-4.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

With an increasingly ageing population in Australia, more older adults who are frail are living in residential aged care facilities (RACFs). The aim of this study was to detail the type, scope, and funding of physiotherapy utilised in Australian RACFs.

METHODS

Registered physiotherapists (n = 219, 72% female, mean age (SD) = 38.6 (12.9) years) working in Australian RACFs participated in a nationwide, cross-sectional online survey. The survey was developed iteratively through a review of the literature and clinical guidelines, consensus of final survey items by an expert panel of five senior physiotherapists and aged care managers. Survey questions related to the characteristics of the physiotherapists (e.g., age, gender, employment status), characteristics of the RACFs (e.g., state, remoteness, sector), the type and scope of physiotherapy provided by respondents, and the availability of equipment and certain spaces (e.g., gyms) in the RACFs that respondents worked in. Survey responses were analysed and presented descriptively. Correlation using Spearman's rho (ρ) and the associated 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used to determine whether the availability of equipment or space at the RACF was associated with the time dedicated to performing non-Aged Care Funding Instrument (ACFI) tasks.

RESULTS

Common reasons for physiotherapy referral were chronic pain management as per the ACFI framework (89.7%), falls (69.2%), and reduced mobility (35.9%). Rehabilitation or short-term restorative care was provided in only 22.2% of the facilities. The ACFI funded 91.4% of all participants, which limited physiotherapists to low-value chronic pain management including massage and electrical stimulation. Respondents spent 64.5% of their time on ACFI tasks, which equated to 19 h per week. More time was spent on non-ACFI tasks particularly when resistance bands (ρ = 0.28, 95%CI 0.14-0.41) and a dedicated therapy space or gym (ρ = 0.19, 95%CI 0.04-0.33) were available.

CONCLUSIONS

The expertise of physiotherapists is currently being under-utilised in Australian RACFs, which may be related to the availability of public funding, equipment, and space for therapy. Therefore, public health policy should address the urgent need for high-value, evidence-based physiotherapy that supports the reablement and independence of older adults living in RACFs.

摘要

背景

随着澳大利亚人口老龄化的加剧,越来越多的虚弱老年人居住在养老院。本研究旨在详细介绍澳大利亚养老院中使用的物理治疗的类型、范围和资金情况。

方法

参与全国性横断面在线调查的注册物理治疗师(n=219,72%为女性,平均年龄(标准差)=38.6(12.9)岁)在澳大利亚养老院工作。该调查通过文献回顾和临床指南进行了迭代开发,最终调查项目由五位资深物理治疗师和老年护理经理组成的专家小组达成共识。调查问题涉及物理治疗师的特征(例如年龄、性别、就业状况)、养老院的特征(例如州、偏远程度、部门)、受访者提供的物理治疗类型和范围,以及受访者工作的养老院中设备和某些空间(例如健身房)的可用性。对调查结果进行了分析和描述性呈现。使用 Spearman's rho (ρ) 和相关的 95%置信区间 (CI) 进行相关性分析,以确定养老院设备或空间的可用性是否与执行非老年护理资金工具 (ACFI) 任务的时间有关。

结果

物理治疗转诊的常见原因是根据 ACFI 框架进行慢性疼痛管理(89.7%)、跌倒(69.2%)和活动能力下降(35.9%)。仅在 22.2%的设施中提供康复或短期恢复性护理。ACFI 资助了所有参与者的 91.4%,这限制了物理治疗师只能进行低价值的慢性疼痛管理,包括按摩和电刺激。受访者将 64.5%的时间用于 ACFI 任务,相当于每周 19 小时。当有阻力带(ρ=0.28,95%CI 0.14-0.41)和专用治疗空间或健身房(ρ=0.19,95%CI 0.04-0.33)时,会花费更多时间进行非 ACFI 任务。

结论

澳大利亚养老院中物理治疗师的专业知识目前未得到充分利用,这可能与公共资金、设备和治疗空间的可用性有关。因此,公共卫生政策应解决养老院中老年人重新获得能力和独立生活所需的高价值、基于证据的物理治疗的迫切需求。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9890/9331124/a06c5a714b44/12877_2022_3248_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验