Therapist perceptions of the Danish Physiotherapy Research Database for assessing patients with chronic disease

• Published in: PloS one Vol. 16; no. 11; p. e0259355
• Main Authors: Stubbs, Peter W, Stabel, Henriette H, Andersen, Nils-Bo de Vos, Smith, Helle Rønn, Næss-Schmidt, Erhard T
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Public Library of Science 04.11.2021; Public Library of Science (PLoS)
• Subjects: Activities of daily living; Adult; Assessments; Biology and Life Sciences; Care and treatment; Chronic Disease - rehabilitation; Chronic diseases; Chronic illnesses; Clinical Decision-Making; Clinics; Comminution; Complications and side effects; Databases, Factual; Decision making; Decision Support Systems, Clinical; Denmark; Feedback; Female; Humans; Information management; Internet; Male; Medicine and Health Sciences; Middle Aged; Online databases; Outpatient care facilities; Patient outcomes; Patients; People and Places; Physical Therapists - psychology; Physical therapy; Physical Therapy Modalities - standards; Pilot Projects; Polls & surveys; Primary care; Privacy; Questionnaires; Research and Analysis Methods; Social Sciences; Surveys and Questionnaires; Therapeutics, Physiological; Time Factors; Denmark; Aarhus Denmark
• ISSN: 1932-6203; 1932-6203
• DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0259355

The Danish Physiotherapy Research Database for chronic patients receiving Free of Charge Physiotherapy (PhysDB-FCP) was piloted over a 1-year period. The purpose of the PhysDB-FCP is to provide a user friendly digital online structured tool that standardizes initial and follow up clinical assessments generating data that can be used for clinical decision making and support future research in physiotherapy for patients with chronic disease. Although initial assessments were completed, the attrition rate was 73% and 90% at 3- and 6- months, respectively, which suggests problems with the current tool. To evaluate the perspectives of the physiotherapists that used the PhysDB-FCP and propose changes to the tool based on this feedback. Fifty of the 103 physiotherapists introduced to the PhysDB-FCP completed an anonymous online survey. Physiotherapists were asked Likert/categorical and yes/no questions on experiences with the PhysDB-FCP within their practice, perceptions of patient experiences, suitability of the resources and support provided by the PhysDB-FCP working group and the ideal administration frequency of the assessments within the PhysDB-FCP. Open ended feedback on possible improvements to the PhysDB-FCP was also collected. Physiotherapists agreed that the PhysDB-FCP was useful for taking a physiotherapy assessment (74%) and the patient survey was useful for goal setting (72%). Although physiotherapists felt the PhysDB-FCP was well-defined (82%), only 36% would like to use a similar tool again. Generally, the PhysDB-FCP was too time-consuming, administered too frequently and included irrelevant items. For example, 72% of physiotherapists took >45 min to administer the assessment in the first consultation which was performed over multiple sessions. The perspectives of physiotherapists using The PhysDB-FCP suggest specific changes that will ensure better use of the tool in future practice. Changes will likely involve administering the assessment less frequently (every 6-months to 1-year), shortening the assessment, and using diagnosis-specific assessment items.