13
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    4
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      STEMS pilot trial: a pilot cluster randomised controlled trial to investigate the addition of patient direct access to physiotherapy to usual GP-led primary care for adults with musculoskeletal pain

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Introduction

          Around 17% of general practitioner (GP) consultations are for musculoskeletal conditions, which will rise as the population ages. Patient direct access to physiotherapy provides one solution, yet adoption in the National Health Service (NHS) has been slow.

          Setting

          A pilot, pragmatic, non-inferiority, cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) in general practice and physiotherapy services in the UK.

          Objectives

          Investigate feasibility of a main RCT.

          Participants

          Adult patients registered in participating practices and consulting with a musculoskeletal problem.

          Interventions

          4 general practices (clusters) randomised to provide GP-led care as usual or the addition of a patient direct access to physiotherapy pathway.

          Outcomes

          Process outcomes and exploratory analyses of clinical and cost outcomes.

          Data collection

          Participant-level data were collected via questionnaires at identification, 2, 6 and 12 months and through medical records.

          Blinding

          The study statistician and research nurses were blinded to practice allocation.

          Results

          Of 2696 patients invited to complete study questionnaires, 978 participated (intervention group n=425, control arm n=553) and were analysed. Participant recruitment was completed in 6 months. Follow-up rates were 78% (6 months) and 71% (12 months). No evidence of selection bias was observed. The direct access pathway was used by 90% of patients in intervention practices needing physiotherapy. Some increase in referrals to physiotherapy occurred from one practice, although waiting times for physiotherapy did not increase (28 days before, 26 days after introduction of direct access). No safety issues were identified. Clinical and cost outcomes were similar in both groups. Exploratory estimates of between group effect (using 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) Physical Component Summary (PCS)) at 6 months was −0.28 (95% CI −1.35 to 0.79) and at 12 months 0.12 (95% CI −1.27 to 1.51).

          Conclusions

          A full RCT is feasible and will provide trial evidence about the clinical and cost-effectiveness of patient direct access to physiotherapy.

          Trial registration number

          ISRCTN23378642.

          Related collections

          Most cited references11

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Determining minimally important changes in generic and disease-specific health-related quality of life questionnaires in clinical trials of rheumatoid arthritis.

          To define clinically meaningful changes in 2 widely used health-related quality of life (HQL) instruments in studies of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Patients with RA (n = 693) who were enrolled in 2 double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials completed the Short Form 36 (SF-36) modified health survey and the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) disability index at baseline and 6-week followup assessments. Data on 5 RA severity measures were also collected at baseline and at 6 weeks (patient and physician global assessments, joint swelling and tenderness counts, and global pain assessment). Comparison of changes in the SF-36 scales and HAQ scores was made between groups of patients known to differ in the level of change on each RA severity measure. With few exceptions, changes in the SF-36 and HAQ scores were different between patients who differed in the level of change on each RA severity measure. Changes in the SF-36 and HAQ scores were more strongly related to changes in the patient and physician global assessments and patient pain assessment than to changes in the joint swelling and tenderness counts. Based on these results, minimally important changes in the SF-36 scales and HAQ disability scores were determined, which will be useful in interpreting HQL results in clinical trials.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Methodological bias in cluster randomised trials

            Background Cluster randomised trials can be susceptible to a range of methodological problems. These problems are not commonly recognised by many researchers. In this paper we discuss the issues that can lead to bias in cluster trials. Methods We used a sample of cluster randomised trials from a recent review and from a systematic review of hip protectors. We compared the mean age of participants between intervention groups in a sample of 'good' cluster trials with a sample of potentially biased trials. We also compared the effect sizes, in a funnel plot, between hip protector trials that used individual randomisation compared with those that used cluster randomisation. Results There is a tendency for cluster trials, with evidence methodological biases, to also show an age imbalance between treatment groups. In a funnel plot we show that all cluster trials show a large positive effect of hip protectors whilst individually randomised trials show a range of positive and negative effects, suggesting that cluster trials may be producing a biased estimate of effect. Conclusion Methodological biases in the design and execution of cluster randomised trials is frequent. Some of these biases associated with the use of cluster designs can be avoided through careful attention to the design of cluster trials. Firstly, if possible, individual allocation should be used. Secondly, if cluster allocation is required, then ideally participants should be identified before random allocation of the clusters. Third, if prior identification is not possible, then an independent recruiter should be used to recruit participants.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              The General Practice Assessment Questionnaire (GPAQ) – Development and psychometric characteristics

              Background Continual quality improvement in primary care is an international priority. In the United Kingdom, the major initiative for improving quality of care is the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QoF) of the 2004 GP contract. Although the primary focus of the QoF is on clinical care, it is acknowledged that a comprehensive assessment of quality also requires valid and reliable measurement of the patient perspective, so financial incentives are included in the contract for general practices to survey patients' views. One questionnaire specified for use in the QoF is the General Practice Assessment Questionnaire (GPAQ). This paper describes the development of the GPAQ (with post-consultation and postal versions) and presents a preliminary examination of the psychometric properties of the questionnaire. Methods Description of scale development and preliminary analysis of psychometric characteristics (internal reliability, factor structure), based on a large dataset of routinely collected GPAQ surveys (n = 190,038 responses to the consultation version of GPAQ and 20,309 responses to the postal version) from practices in the United Kingdom during the 2005–6 contract year. Results Respondents tend to report generally favourable ratings. Responses were particularly skewed on the GP communication scale, though no more so than for other questionnaires in current use in the UK for which data were available. Factor analysis identified 2 factors that clearly relate to core concepts in primary care quality ('access' and 'interpersonal care') that were common to both version of the GPAQ. The other factors related to 'enablement' in the post-consultation version and 'nursing care' in the postal version. Conclusion This preliminary evaluation indicates that the scales of the GPAQ are internally reliable and that the items demonstrate an interpretable factor structure. Issues concerning the distributions of GPAQ responses are discussed. Potential further developments of the item content for the GPAQ are also outlined.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Open
                bmjopen
                bmjopen
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2044-6055
                2017
                10 March 2017
                : 7
                : 3
                : e012987
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Keele University , Keele, UK
                [2 ]Health Economics Unit, University of Birmingham , Birmingham, UK
                [3 ]Centre for Academic Primary Care, University of Bristol , Bristol, UK
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Dr Annette Bishop; a.bishop@ 123456keele.ac.uk
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9810-7994
                Article
                bmjopen-2016-012987
                10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012987
                5353299
                28286331
                8902ca97-ece6-44c3-92ee-2c1e64237668
                Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/

                This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

                History
                : 12 July 2016
                : 4 January 2017
                : 7 February 2017
                Categories
                Health Services Research
                Research
                1506
                1704
                1696
                1704

                Medicine
                patient direct access,musculoskeletal,physiotherapy,feasibility and pilot trial,primary care

                Comments

                Comment on this article