The organisation of physiotherapy for people with multiple sclerosis across Europe: a multicentre questionnaire survey

Kamila Rasova, Jenny Freeman, Patricia Martinkova, Marketa Pavlikova, Davide Cattaneo, Johanna Jonsdottir, Thomas Henze, Ilse Baert, Paul Van Asch, Carme Santoyo, Tori Smedal, Antonie Giæver Beiske, Małgorzata Stachowiak, Mariusz Kovalewski, Una Nedeljkovic, Daphne Bakalidou, José Manuel Alves Guerreiro, Ylva Nilsagård, Erieta Nikolikj Dimitrova, Mario Habek, Kadriye Armutlu, Cécile Donzé, Elaine Ross, Ana Maria Ilie, Andrej Martić, Anders Romberg, Peter Feys, Kamila Rasova, Jenny Freeman, Patricia Martinkova, Marketa Pavlikova, Davide Cattaneo, Johanna Jonsdottir, Thomas Henze, Ilse Baert, Paul Van Asch, Carme Santoyo, Tori Smedal, Antonie Giæver Beiske, Małgorzata Stachowiak, Mariusz Kovalewski, Una Nedeljkovic, Daphne Bakalidou, José Manuel Alves Guerreiro, Ylva Nilsagård, Erieta Nikolikj Dimitrova, Mario Habek, Kadriye Armutlu, Cécile Donzé, Elaine Ross, Ana Maria Ilie, Andrej Martić, Anders Romberg, Peter Feys

Abstract

Background: Understanding the organisational set-up of physiotherapy services across different countries is increasingly important as clinicians around the world use evidence to improve their practice. This also has to be taken into consideration when multi-centre international clinical trials are conducted. This survey aimed to systematically describe organisational aspects of physiotherapy services for people with multiple sclerosis (MS) across Europe.

Methods: Representatives from 72 rehabilitation facilities within 23 European countries completed an online web-based questionnaire survey between 2013 and 2014. Countries were categorised according to four European regions (defined by United Nations Statistics). Similarities and differences between regions were examined.

Results: Most participating centres specialized in rehabilitation (82 %) and neurology (60 %), with only 38 % specialising in MS. Of these, the Western based Specialist MS centres were predominately based on outpatient services (median MS inpatient ratio 0.14), whilst the Eastern based European services were mostly inpatient in nature (median MS inpatient ratio 0.5). In almost all participating countries, medical doctors - specialists in neurology (60 %) and in rehabilitation (64 %) - were responsible for referral to/prescription of physiotherapy. The most frequent reason for referral to/prescription of physiotherapy was the worsening of symptoms (78 % of centres). Physiotherapists were the most common members of the rehabilitation team; comprising 49 % of the team in Eastern countries compared to approximately 30 % in the rest of Europe. Teamwork was commonly adopted; 86 % of centres based in Western countries utilised the interdisciplinary model, whilst the multidisciplinary model was utilised in Eastern based countries (p = 0.046).

Conclusion: This survey is the first to provide data about organisational aspects of physiotherapy for people with MS across Europe. Overall, care in key organisational aspects of service provision is broadly similar across regions, although some variations, for example the models of teamwork utilised, are apparent. Organisational framework specifics should be considered anytime a multi-centre study is conducted and results from such studies are applied.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Type of teamwork across Europeans regions. Graph shows proportion of answers by 72 respondents together with counts in parentheses. Multidisciplinary team was defined as “specialists work in parallel towards addressing problems related to their profession”. Interdisciplinary team was defined as “specialists working as a group to achieve a common goal that is explicitly agreed upon”. Type of teamwork differs across the regions (Fisher exact test; p = 0.046)
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Distribution of professionals and groups of professionals in the team, for different European regions. Mean proportion of various professions in the team across regions and Europe in given in the graphs. For the χ2-test the professions were pooled as follows: sport instructors, occupational therapists and speech/swallowing therapists into “specialised physical care” category, social workers and psychologists into “psychosocial care”. There was a statistically significant difference between regions in the distribution of professionals in teams (p < 0.001). Standardised residuals between observed and expected proportions are given in the second graph. Sensitivity analysis with joining “other” category to either “physical” or “psychosocial” category was performed and confirmed the statistically significant difference between regions (p = 0.015 and p = 0.002 respectively)

References

    1. Hakkennes SJ, Brock K, Hill KD. Selection for inpatient rehabilitation after acute stroke: a systematic review of the literature. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2011;92(12):2057–70. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2011.07.189.
    1. Whiteneck G, Gassaway J, Dijkers M, Backus D, Charlifue S, Chen D, et al. The SCIRehab project: treatment time spent in SCI rehabilitation. Inpatient treatment time across disciplines in spinal cord injury rehabilitation. J Spinal Cord Med. 2011;34(2):133–48. doi: 10.1179/107902611X12971826988011.
    1. Slade A, Tennant A, Chamberlain MA. A randomised controlled trial to determine the effect of intensity of therapy upon length of stay in a neurological rehabilitation setting. J Rehabil Med. 2002;34(6):260–6. doi: 10.1080/165019702760390347.
    1. New PW, Simmonds F, Stevermuer T. Comparison of patients managed in specialised spinal rehabilitation units with those managed in non-specialised rehabilitation units. Spinal Cord. 2011;49(8):909–16. doi: 10.1038/sc.2011.29.
    1. Rasova K, Feys P, Henze T, van Tongeren H, Cattaneo D, Jonsdottir J, et al. Emerging evidence-based physical rehabilitation for multiple sclerosis - towards an inventory of current content across Europe. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2010;8:76. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-8-76.
    1. Hoffmann TC, Glasziou PP, Boutron I, Milne R, Perera R, Moher D, et al. Better reporting of interventions: template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide. BMJ [Br Med J] 2014;348:g1687.
    1. Wade DT, de Jong BA. Recent advances in rehabilitation. BMJ [Br Med J] 2000;320(7246):1385–8. doi: 10.1136/bmj.320.7246.1385.
    1. Jette DU, Bacon K, Batty C, Carlson M, Ferland A, Hemingway RD, et al. Evidence-based practice: beliefs, attitudes, knowledge, and behaviors of physical therapists. Phys Ther. 2003;83(9):786–805.
    1. Rasova KMP, Cattaneo D, Jonsdottir J, Henze T, Baert I, Feys P, et al. Physical therapy in MS across Europe: a questionnaire survey 19th Annual RIMS Conference. Brighton: Rehabilitation in Multiple Sclerosis; 2014.
    1. Cooper CJ, Cooper SP, del Junco DJ, Shipp EM, Whitworth R, Cooper SR. Web-based data collection: detailed methods of a questionnaire and data gathering tool. Epidemiol Perspect Innov. 2006;3:1. doi: 10.1186/1742-5573-3-1.
    1. United Nations Statistics Department. Composition of macro geographical (continental) regions, geographical sub-regions, and selected economic and other groupings." Retrieved 3.5., 2014: .
    1. Pinchoff D. "Autonomous Practice in Physical Therapy." Retrieved 5.8.2016: .
    1. Black DA, Grant C. The services and social needs of people with multiple sclerosis in New South Wales. Aust J Rehabil. 1994;60(4):60.
    1. Finlayson M, Plow M, Cho C. Use of physical therapy services among middle-aged and older adults with multiple sclerosis. Phys Ther. 2010;90(11):1607–18. doi: 10.2522/ptj.20100072.
    1. Gottberg K, Einarsson U, Ytterberg C, Fredrikson S, von Koch L, Holmqvist LW. Use of health care services and satisfaction with care in people with multiple sclerosis in Stockholm County: a population-based study. Mult Scler. 2008;14(7):962–71. doi: 10.1177/1352458508089688.
    1. Milivojevic I, Adamec I, Habek M. Utilization of physical rehabilitation among people with multiple sclerosis. Ir J Med Sci. 2013;182(3):429–32. doi: 10.1007/s11845-013-0905-2.
    1. Moorer P, Suurmeijer TH, Zwanikken CP. Health care utilization by people with multiple sclerosis in The Netherlands: results of two separate studies. Disabil Rehabil. 2000;22(16):695–701. doi: 10.1080/09638280050191963.
    1. Nulty DD. The adequacy of response rates to online and paper surveys: what can be done? Assessment & evaluation in higher education. 2008. p. 301–14.
    1. van Gelder MM, Bretveld RW, Roeleveld N. Web-based questionnaires: the future in epidemiology? Am J Epidemiol. 2010;172(11):1292–8. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwq291.
    1. Turner-Stokes L. BSRM standards for Specialist Rehabilitation Services mapped on to the NSF for Long Term Conditions. BSRM, London; 2008. [updated 11.8.2014].
    1. Gritzer G, Arluke A. The making of rehabilitation: a political economy of medical specialization: 1890–1980. California: University of California Press; 1985.
    1. European Multiple Sclerosis Platform. "Recommendation on Rehabilitation Services for Persons with Multipe Sclersosis in Europe". Retrieved 28.4., 2014: .
    1. Platform EMS . In: Defeating MS Together - the revised Code of Good Practice in MS. Willett A, editor. Brussel: European Multiple Sclerosis Platform; 2014.
    1. Khan F, Turner-Stokes L, Ng L, Kilpatrick T. Multidisciplinary rehabilitation for adults with multiple sclerosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007(2):Cd006036.
    1. Rasova K, Cattaneo D, Jonsdottir J, Van Asch P. The interdisciplinary approach. In: T. H, editor. Recommendation on Rehabilitation Services for Persons with Multipe Sclersosis in Europe European Multiple Sclerosis Platform; 2012. p. 212.
    1. Turner-Stokes L. Evidence for the effectiveness of multi-disciplinary rehabilitation following acquired brain injury: a synthesis of two systematic approaches. J Rehabil Med. 2008;40(9):691–701. doi: 10.2340/16501977-0265.
    1. Suddick KM, De Souza L. Therapists’ experiences and perceptions of teamwork in neurological rehabilitation: reasoning behind the team approach, structure and composition of the team and teamworking processes. Physiother Res Int. 2006;11(2):72–83. doi: 10.1002/pri.325.
    1. Dalley J, Sim J. Nurses’ perceptions of physiotherapists as rehabilitation team members. Clin Rehabil. 2001;15(4):380–9. doi: 10.1191/026921501678310180.
    1. Atwal A, Caldwell K. Do all health and social care professionals interact equally: a study of interactions in multidisciplinary teams in the United Kingdom. Scand J Caring Sci. 2005;19(3):268–73. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6712.2005.00338.x.
    1. Wade DT. Selection criteria for rehabilitation services. Clin Rehabil. 2003;17(2):115–8. doi: 10.1191/0269215503cr591ed.
    1. Maulden SA, Gassaway J, Horn SD, Smout RJ, DeJong G. Timing of initiation of rehabilitation after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;86(12 Suppl 2):S34–S40. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2005.08.119.
    1. Khan F, Pallant JF. Use of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) to identify preliminary comprehensive and brief core sets for multiple sclerosis. Disabil Rehabil. 2007;29(3):205–13. doi: 10.1080/09638280600756141.

Source: PubMed

Подписаться