Musculoskeletal Health and Rehabilitation Research Group, School of Health, Medical and Applied Sciences, College of Health Sciences, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, Queensland, Australia.
Department of Physiotherapy, School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Physiother Res Int. 2024 Oct;29(4):e2125. doi: 10.1002/pri.2125.
Understanding physiotherapy practices is important to identify variations from empirical evidence and highlight requirements for training. This survey explored international physiotherapy practices for assessment of lateral elbow tendinopathy (LET).
Two hundred ninety-nine surveyed physiotherapists from eight member countries of the International Federation of Manual and Orthopaedic Physical Therapists completed the survey. Respondents rated their frequency of use (never, rarely, sometimes, often, and always) for items related to: patient history; diagnostic tests; grip and upper limb strength; cervical and neurological assessment; and medical imaging. To establish practices, the five response categories were dichotomised into routine practice (often, always) and not-routine practice (sometimes, rarely, never). A response rate of ≥70% for each dichotomy was used to determine whether an assessment item was deemed routine practice or not, with items not meeting either criterion considered neither routine nor not-routine practice.
Most respondents were from United States (63%). The 'chair pick up test', 'cervical special tests', and 'plain radiograph' met our criteria for not routine practice (i.e., 70%, 72%, and 71%, respectively). All other assessment items did not meet the criteria to be considered routine or not-routine practice.
The chair pick-up test, cervical spine special tests (e.g., Spurling's test), and plain radiography appear to not be routinely used in the assessment of LET. The finding that no assessment technique met the criteria for routine use may imply that physiotherapists adopt a nuanced approach to selecting clinical assessment items as opposed to routinely applying tests.
了解物理治疗实践对于识别与经验证据的差异以及突出培训需求非常重要。本调查研究了国际物理治疗师在评估外侧肘肌腱病(LET)方面的实践情况。
来自国际手与矫形物理治疗师联合会的 8 个成员国的 299 名调查物理治疗师完成了这项调查。受访者对与以下方面相关的项目的使用频率(从不、很少、有时、经常和总是)进行了评分:患者病史;诊断测试;握力和上肢力量;颈椎和神经评估;以及医学影像。为了确定实践情况,将五个响应类别分为常规实践(经常、总是)和非常规实践(有时、很少、从不)。每个二分法的响应率≥70%用于确定评估项目是否被视为常规实践,如果任何项目不符合这两个标准,则被认为既不是常规实践也不是非常规实践。
大多数受访者来自美国(63%)。“椅子捡物测试”、“颈椎特殊测试”和“普通 X 光片”不符合我们的非常规实践标准(分别为 70%、72%和 71%)。其他所有评估项目都不符合常规或非常规实践的标准。
椅子捡物测试、颈椎特殊测试(如 Spurling 测试)和普通 X 光片似乎并未在 LET 的评估中常规使用。没有任何评估技术符合常规使用标准的发现可能意味着物理治疗师在选择临床评估项目时采用了细致入微的方法,而不是常规应用测试。