Clinical Reasoning Process of Physiotherapists When Observing Hemiplegic Gait

April 23, 2017 updated by: Clare Maguire, Technical University of Bern
The goal of this study is to find out what clinical reasoning process physiotherapists undergo when observing hemiplegic patients gait.

Study Overview

Status

Completed

Conditions

Intervention / Treatment

Detailed Description

Physiotherapists don't usually use any assessments to evaluate gait but observe it without an instrument. The questions in this study are:

  • what abnormalities can physiotherapists detect when observing a patient walking?
  • what do they consider the main problem that has a negative effect on the patient's walking?
  • what hypothesis do they generate?
  • how is the inter-rater reliability for the "main problem" and the hypothesis?

Study Type

Observational

Enrollment (Actual)

54

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Child
  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Sampling Method

Non-Probability Sample

Study Population

physiotherapists working with stroke patients

Description

Inclusion criteria:

  • chartered physiotherapists
  • physiotherapists in training
  • working with stroke patients

Exclusion criteria:

- other languages than German

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

Cohorts and Interventions

Group / Cohort
Intervention / Treatment
PT's working in stroke in NW-Switzerland

54 Physiotherapists (PT's) working in north-west Switzerland (at Bruderholzspital, RehaB Basel, Klinik Tschugg, Reha Rheinfelden, RehaClinic Zurzach) are asked to analyse videos of 6 hemiplegic patients when walking. They are asked to write down their main observations, the major problem and hypotheses about how this major problem is produced.

There is no intervention.
Other: No intervention
No intervention

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Number of Gait Abnormalities Observed
Time Frame: up to 2 months

The questionnaire will be the basis of this study as it will be the basis for open coding. It is handed out to 54 observers (=physiotherapists) and will be filled in 6 times (for 6 patient videos).

The questionnaire consists of 3 main questions:

  1. what gait abnormalities do you see?
  2. What do you consider the main problem (1 sentence)
  3. what is your hypothesis (max. 3) The question one delivers different items (each new observation is a new item) that were determined patient by patient and rater by rater by three independent researchers. They were then listed and categorised by consensus. Finally, the frequency of each item was analysed globally and for each patient.
up to 2 months
Number of Main Problems Observed
Time Frame: up to 2 months
This outcome is a result of the second part of the Questionnaire: 1) What Gait Abnormalities do You See? 2) What do You Consider the Main Problem (1 Sentence) 3) What is Your Hypothesis (Max. 3) By consensus the three independent researchers identified the main statements from the sentences written. Items were afterwards categorised. Finally the frequency of each item was analysed globally and for each patient.
up to 2 months
Number of Hypotheses Observed
Time Frame: up to 2 months
This outcome is a result of the third part of the questionnaire: 1) What Gait Abnormalities do You See? 2) What do You Consider the Main Problem (1 Sentence) 3) What is Your Hypothesis (Max. 3) By consensus the three independent researchers identified and categorised all the listed hypotheses from question number three of the questionnaire. After that the use frequency of each item was analysed globally and for each patient.
up to 2 months

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Technical University of Bern

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start

March 1, 2015

Primary Completion (Actual)

June 1, 2015

Study Completion (Actual)

December 1, 2015

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

July 15, 2015

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

July 17, 2015

First Posted (Estimate)

July 21, 2015

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

August 2, 2017

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

April 23, 2017

Last Verified

April 1, 2017

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

  • EKNZ08/12/14

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

YES

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Stroke

Clinical Trials on No intervention

Search Similar Trials

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

CROs by country

CROs in Morocco

Conditions

Rare Diseases

Drug Interventions

Dietary Supplements

Sponsor/Collaborators

Locations

Subscribe