| Literature DB >> 29340196 |
Folarin Omoniyi Babatunde1, Joy Christine MacDermid2,3,4, Norma MacIntyre5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Nonadherence to treatment remains high among patients with musculoskeletal conditions with negative impact on the treatment outcomes, use of personal and cost of care. An active knowledge translation (KT) strategy may be an effective strategy to support practice change. The purpose of this study was to deliver a brief, interactive, multifaceted and targeted KT program to improve physiotherapist knowledge and confidence in performing adherence enhancing activities related to risk, barriers, assessment and interventions.Entities:
Keywords: Active strategy; Adherence; Exercise; Knowledge translation; Physiotherapy
Year: 2017 PMID: 29340196 PMCID: PMC5759916 DOI: 10.1186/s40945-016-0029-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Arch Physiother ISSN: 2057-0082
Fig. 1The knowledge-to-action process (Harrison MB, Legare F, Graham ID, Fervers B, Adapting clinical practice guidelines to local context and assessing barriers to their use, 2010;182:E78-E84)
Fig. 2Flow chart of study design based on knowledge translation-to-action cycle: Phase 1 [(Step 1) Identification of MSK practice KT needs, (Step 2) Creating KT intervention], Phase 2 [(Step 3) Implementation of KT Strategy, (Step 4)] KT Evaluation. PT = Physiotherapist, OT = Occupational Therapist, BIM- Barriers-Interventions-Measures, MSK = Musculoskeletal, CSHT = Canadian Society of Hand therapy, CPA = Canadian Physiotherapy Association, KT = Knowledge Translation
KT intervention: SIMPLE TIPS tool kit
| Strategy | Key Messages |
|---|---|
| S – Simplify the regimen | 1. Limit exercise prescription to a minimum of 2–5 exercises. |
| I – Impart knowledge | 1. Talk using nontechnical langauge. |
| M - Modify psychological response and beliefs | 1. Assess and review psychosocial barriers to exercise. |
| P – Promote therapeutic alliance | 1. Create an atmosphere that is both challenging and empowering for patients. |
| L - Leave the bias behind | 1. Avoid patient stereotypes that connote negative persoanl qualities. |
| E - Evaluate adherence | 1. Develop a strategy that patients can use to monitor their own adherence. |
| T – Technology can be helpful | 1. Use text messaging, mobile phone or email reminders when appropriate. |
| I – Identify and mitigate barriers | 1. Recommend time-efficeint exercises. |
| P – Plan for follow-up | 1. Provide booster sessions for long term conditions. |
| S – Set goals | 1. Encourage the setting of SMART goals. |
Summary of barriers to and facilitators reported by therapists at the CSHT session
| Domain | Barriers | Facilitators |
|---|---|---|
| Therapist | ||
| Attitude | • Not therapists’ responsibility | • Change perception |
| Competence | • Poor knowledge | • Education |
| Healthcare system | ||
| Colleagues | • Lack of awareness | • Opportunities through in-service training |
| Outcome Measures | • Poor availability | • Increased access |
| Practice pattern | • Absence of practice policy | • Create policy |
| Patient | ||
| Attitude | • Previous experience | • Open discussion |
| Clinic-based treatment | • Transportation difficulties | • Management planning, support |
| Home-based exercise | • Too many exercises | • Review exercise protocol |
Characteristics of participants in Phase 2 of the study
| Characteristic | Number | Percent |
|---|---|---|
| Gender | ||
| Female | 20 | 57.1 |
| Male | 15 | 42.8 |
| Experience | ||
| < 1 year | 5 | 14.2 |
| < 5 years | 4 | 11.4 |
| < 10 years | 4 | 11.4 |
| < 15 years | 4 | 11.4 |
| < 20 years | 5 | 14.2 |
| > 20 years | 9 | 25.7 |
| Geographical area | ||
| Alberta | 3 | 8.5 |
| British Columbia | 2 | 5.7 |
| New Brunswick | 3 | 8.5 |
| New Foundland | 1 | 2.8 |
| Nova Scotia | 12 | 34 |
| Ontario | 9 | 25.7 |
| Quebec | 1 | 2.8 |
| Saskatchewan | 2 | 5.7 |
| Type of Facility | ||
| Acute care hospital | 4 | 11.4 |
| Acute/subacute Rehabilitation | 4 | 11.4 |
| Private outpatient clinic | 6 | 17.1 |
| Facility-based outpatient clinic | 9 | 25.7 |
| Long term care/Community | 4 | 11.4 |
| School system | 1 | 2.8 |
| Industrial | 1 | 2.8 |
| Academic/Research | 4 | 11.4 |
| Animal rehab | 1 | 2.8 |
| Type of condition | ||
| Orthopedic/MSK | 15 | 42.8 |
| Neurological | 2 | 5.7 |
| Cardiorespiratory | 1 | 2.8 |
| Pediatrics | 2 | 5.7 |
| Geriatrics | 3 | 8.5 |
| Women’s Health | 1 | 2.8 |
| Unspecified | 6 | 17.1 |
| No patient care | 4 | 11.4 |
| Non-human | 1 | 2.8 |
Proportion of respondents divided by experience, setting and region
| Assessment of barriers | Maybe | No | Yes |
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| % |
| % |
| % | ||
| Experience ( | |||||||
| ≤ 10 years | 5 | 63 | 4 | 44 | 10 | 58 | 0.526 |
| > 10 years | 2 | 25 | 5 | 55 | 7 | 42 | |
| Setting ( | |||||||
| Private practice | 3 | 42 | 1 | 12 | 5 | 31 | 0.04 |
| Outpatients | 0 | 1 | 12 | 7 | 43 | ||
| Inpatients | 4 | 47 | 1 | 12 | 7 | 43 | |
| Region ( | |||||||
| Central | 2 | 29 | 3 | 42 | 5 | 31 | 1.000 |
| Maritimes | 4 | 57 | 3 | 42 | 8 | 50 | |
| Prairies | 1 | 14 | 1 | 14 | 3 | 18 | |
| Measuring Adherence | |||||||
| Experience ( | |||||||
| ≤ 15 years | 5 | 63 | 2 | 23 | 12 | 70 | 0.080 |
| > 15 years | 3 | 37 | 7 | 77 | 5 | 29 | |
| Setting ( | |||||||
| Private practice | 3 | 42 | 0 | 7 | 43 | 0.035 | |
| Outpatients | 2 | 28 | 3 | 33 | 7 | 43 | |
| Inpatients | 2 | 28 | 6 | 66 | 2 | 12 | |
| Region ( | |||||||
| Central | 3 | 37 | 1 | 14 | 6 | 37 | 0.213 |
| Maritimes | 2 | 25 | 5 | 72 | 9 | 47 | |
| Prairies | 3 | 37 | 1 | 14 | 1 | 6 | |
aFisher’s exact test
Strategies used to improve adherence in practice before the educational session
| Themes | Components | Percent |
|---|---|---|
| Motivational and Behavioral | • Facilitate internal locus of control | 32.3 |
| Communication | • Active listening | 11.7 |
| Exercise prescription | • Limiting number of exercises prescribed | 55.8 |
| Patient | • Leave responsibility to the patient | 11.7 |
| Education | • Review of anatomical structures and effect of exercise | 38.2 |
| Technique | • Ensure proper demonstration | 11.7 |
| Visual aids | • Use of print materials | 23.5 |
| Follow-up | • Review of home exercises regularly | 11.7 |
| Goal planning and setting | • Plan a daily consistent routine | 26.4 |
| Treatment | • Participation in group program | 17.6 |
| Technology | • Wearable devices | 5.7 |
| Outcomes | • Functional outcomes | 5.7 |
Fig. 3Reported strategies for improving adherence by participants during pre-session assessment of Phase 2
Fig. 4Participants’ rating of the quality of the educational session in Phase 2
Fig. 5Participants’ rating of Phase 2 session impact on adherence knowledge, measures, barriers and interventions
Pre and post session self-efficacy scores for adherence enhancing skills
| Activity | Average Score (100%) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pre-session | Pre-score median (IQR) | Post-score Median (IQR) | Change | Z value |
|
| How confident are you in your ability to identity patients at risk of nonadherence | 67.5 (30–90) | 75 (40–95) | −10 | −4.42 | 0.00001 |
| How confident are you in your ability to assess barriers to exercise | 70 (20–90) | 80 (35–95) | −10 | −4.45 | 0.00001 |
| How confident are you in your ability to assess whether patients are following treatment recommendations | 70 (25–100) | 80 (40–100) | −10 | −4.532 | 0.00001 |
| How confident are you in your ability to develop and implement strategies to improve adherence to exercise | 60 (25–90) | 80 (50–95) | −20 | −4.66 | 0.00001 |
aWilcoxon Signed Rank test
Participant’s plan post session for improving patient adherence
| Goals | Details ( | Percent |
|---|---|---|
| Outcome measures | Use adherence instruments suggested in practice | 52 |
| Barriers | Explore barriers to adherence with patients | 16 |
| Interventions | Collaborative and functional goals | 32 |
| Continuous learning | Explore suggested tools for measuring adherence and barriers | 16 |
| Communication | Motivational interviewing skills | 28 |
| Unchanged | Continue to encourage patient to take responsibility | 4 |