Kharel Priti, Maher Chris G, Gamble Andrew R, Ferreira Giovanni E, Zadro Joshua R
Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
Institute for Musculoskeletal Health, Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
BMJ Open. 2025 Jun 26;15(6):e097202. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-097202.
QUESTION: What is the effect of Choosing Wisely recommendations on physiotherapists' intentions to refer for imaging and use electrotherapy for low back pain? DESIGN: Three-arm parallel-group online randomised controlled trial. PARTICIPANTS: Physiotherapists who treat people with low back pain. INTERVENTION: Participants were randomised to receive: (a) two Australian Physiotherapy Association Choosing Wisely recommendations about low back pain, (b) two versions of these recommendations based on previous research and (c) . Participants were then directed to read three clinical vignettes of a person with low back pain and respond to questions regarding each vignette. OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes were physiotherapists' intentions to refer for imaging and use electrotherapy for low back pain. Secondary outcomes were physiotherapists' intentions to use other treatments for low back pain, the influence of the recommendations on decision-making in the vignettes and familiarity with the recommendations. RESULTS: 723 participants opened the survey and 473 (65%) provided complete responses. Across all vignettes, there were no statistically significant differences in intentions to refer for imaging or use electrotherapy between those who received versus (imaging ORs ranging from 0.7 (95% CI 0.5 to 1.0) to 0.9 (0.6 to 1.4); electrotherapy ORs ranging from 0.9 (0.5 to 1.7) to 1.1 (0.7 to 2.0)). Similarly, no significant differences were observed between those who received versus for all three vignettes. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests simply presenting Choosing Wisely recommendations to physiotherapists does not influence their intentions to refer for imaging or use electrotherapy for low back pain, even if the language of the recommendations is optimised.
问题:“明智选择”推荐意见对物理治疗师针对腰痛患者进行影像检查转诊及使用电疗法的意向有何影响? 设计:三臂平行组在线随机对照试验。 参与者:治疗腰痛患者的物理治疗师。 干预措施:参与者被随机分配接受:(a)澳大利亚物理治疗协会关于腰痛的两项“明智选择”推荐意见;(b)基于先前研究的这两项推荐意见的两个版本;(c) 。然后引导参与者阅读一名腰痛患者的三个临床案例,并回答有关每个案例的问题。 观察指标:主要指标为物理治疗师针对腰痛患者进行影像检查转诊及使用电疗法的意向。次要指标为物理治疗师针对腰痛使用其他治疗方法的意向、推荐意见对案例中决策的影响以及对推荐意见的熟悉程度。 结果:723名参与者打开了调查问卷,473名(65%)提供了完整回复。在所有案例中,接受 与 的参与者在影像检查转诊意向或使用电疗法意向方面无统计学显著差异(影像检查的比值比范围为0.7(95%可信区间0.5至1.0)至0.9(0.6至1.4);电疗法的比值比范围为0.9(0.5至1.7)至1.1(0.7至2.0))。同样,在所有三个案例中,接受 与 的参与者之间未观察到显著差异。 结论:我们的研究表明,即使优化了推荐意见的措辞,单纯向物理治疗师呈现“明智选择”推荐意见并不会影响他们针对腰痛患者进行影像检查转诊或使用电疗法的意向。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016-6-10
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016-8-22
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2025-3-7
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016-5-19
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022-11-18
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023-7-28
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005-7-20
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017-8-18
Int J Emerg Med. 2023-11-13
Int J Health Policy Manag. 2023
Musculoskelet Sci Pract. 2022-10
Chiropr Man Therap. 2022-5-3
J Physiother. 2021-7