An international survey of current physiotherapy practice in diagnosis and knowledge translation of greater trochanteric pain syndrome (GTPS)

Helen P. French, Alison Grimaldi, Stephanie Woodley, Louise O'Connor, Angela Fearon

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate how physiotherapists across three countries (Australia, New Zealand (NZ) and Ireland) diagnose greater trochanteric pain syndrome (GTPS) using clinical tests and imaging findings, and how physiotherapists update their knowledge regarding GTPS. Design: Cross-sectional observational study of physiotherapists. Methods: An online survey was distributed to registered physiotherapists in Australia, NZ and Ireland. Ordinal and nominal data were analysed using frequency counts or mean ranks; medians and interquartile ranges were calculated for numerical data. Comparisons between the three countries were made using Chi-squared analyses for nominal/ordinal data and Kruskal Wallis tests for numerical data. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. Results/findings: Valid responses were received from 361 physiotherapists; 61% were female and 79.8% worked in private practice. Most respondents were very confident in diagnosing GTPS (67.9%) and incorporated a range of symptoms and tests, including validated tests, in their diagnosis. However, many physiotherapists were not commonly using some available validated diagnostic tests (e.g. FABER and FADER-R). Approximately 30% of physiotherapists used imaging to inform assessment, with ultrasound being most preferred. Physiotherapists rated hands-on experience as most valuable for updating their knowledge of GTPS, followed by courses. Conclusion: While most clinicians appear to be using current evidence in their assessment of patients with GTPS, a proportion use suboptimal methods and/or a limited range of diagnostic tests, suggesting that despite their confidence in diagnosis, further knowledge translation may be required. Future research should determine the best methods of facilitating knowledge acquisition and translation of research into practice.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)122-126
Number of pages5
JournalMusculoskeletal Science and Practice
Volume43
Early online date25 Jun 2019
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Oct 2019

Fingerprint

Translational Medical Research
Physical Therapists
Pain
New Zealand
Ireland
Routine Diagnostic Tests
Surveys and Questionnaires
Private Practice
Observational Studies
Cross-Sectional Studies
Research

Cite this

@article{aad036488fbe4324a0f2d034f9a87410,
title = "An international survey of current physiotherapy practice in diagnosis and knowledge translation of greater trochanteric pain syndrome (GTPS)",
abstract = "Purpose: To evaluate how physiotherapists across three countries (Australia, New Zealand (NZ) and Ireland) diagnose greater trochanteric pain syndrome (GTPS) using clinical tests and imaging findings, and how physiotherapists update their knowledge regarding GTPS. Design: Cross-sectional observational study of physiotherapists. Methods: An online survey was distributed to registered physiotherapists in Australia, NZ and Ireland. Ordinal and nominal data were analysed using frequency counts or mean ranks; medians and interquartile ranges were calculated for numerical data. Comparisons between the three countries were made using Chi-squared analyses for nominal/ordinal data and Kruskal Wallis tests for numerical data. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. Results/findings: Valid responses were received from 361 physiotherapists; 61{\%} were female and 79.8{\%} worked in private practice. Most respondents were very confident in diagnosing GTPS (67.9{\%}) and incorporated a range of symptoms and tests, including validated tests, in their diagnosis. However, many physiotherapists were not commonly using some available validated diagnostic tests (e.g. FABER and FADER-R). Approximately 30{\%} of physiotherapists used imaging to inform assessment, with ultrasound being most preferred. Physiotherapists rated hands-on experience as most valuable for updating their knowledge of GTPS, followed by courses. Conclusion: While most clinicians appear to be using current evidence in their assessment of patients with GTPS, a proportion use suboptimal methods and/or a limited range of diagnostic tests, suggesting that despite their confidence in diagnosis, further knowledge translation may be required. Future research should determine the best methods of facilitating knowledge acquisition and translation of research into practice.",
author = "French, {Helen P.} and Alison Grimaldi and Stephanie Woodley and Louise O'Connor and Angela Fearon",
year = "2019",
month = "10",
doi = "10.1016/j.msksp.2019.06.002",
language = "English",
volume = "43",
pages = "122--126",
journal = "Musculoskeletal Science and Practice",
issn = "1356-689X",
publisher = "Churchill Livingstone",

}

An international survey of current physiotherapy practice in diagnosis and knowledge translation of greater trochanteric pain syndrome (GTPS). / French, Helen P.; Grimaldi, Alison; Woodley, Stephanie; O'Connor, Louise; Fearon, Angela.

In: Musculoskeletal Science and Practice, Vol. 43, 10.2019, p. 122-126.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - An international survey of current physiotherapy practice in diagnosis and knowledge translation of greater trochanteric pain syndrome (GTPS)

AU - French, Helen P.

AU - Grimaldi, Alison

AU - Woodley, Stephanie

AU - O'Connor, Louise

AU - Fearon, Angela

PY - 2019/10

Y1 - 2019/10

N2 - Purpose: To evaluate how physiotherapists across three countries (Australia, New Zealand (NZ) and Ireland) diagnose greater trochanteric pain syndrome (GTPS) using clinical tests and imaging findings, and how physiotherapists update their knowledge regarding GTPS. Design: Cross-sectional observational study of physiotherapists. Methods: An online survey was distributed to registered physiotherapists in Australia, NZ and Ireland. Ordinal and nominal data were analysed using frequency counts or mean ranks; medians and interquartile ranges were calculated for numerical data. Comparisons between the three countries were made using Chi-squared analyses for nominal/ordinal data and Kruskal Wallis tests for numerical data. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. Results/findings: Valid responses were received from 361 physiotherapists; 61% were female and 79.8% worked in private practice. Most respondents were very confident in diagnosing GTPS (67.9%) and incorporated a range of symptoms and tests, including validated tests, in their diagnosis. However, many physiotherapists were not commonly using some available validated diagnostic tests (e.g. FABER and FADER-R). Approximately 30% of physiotherapists used imaging to inform assessment, with ultrasound being most preferred. Physiotherapists rated hands-on experience as most valuable for updating their knowledge of GTPS, followed by courses. Conclusion: While most clinicians appear to be using current evidence in their assessment of patients with GTPS, a proportion use suboptimal methods and/or a limited range of diagnostic tests, suggesting that despite their confidence in diagnosis, further knowledge translation may be required. Future research should determine the best methods of facilitating knowledge acquisition and translation of research into practice.

AB - Purpose: To evaluate how physiotherapists across three countries (Australia, New Zealand (NZ) and Ireland) diagnose greater trochanteric pain syndrome (GTPS) using clinical tests and imaging findings, and how physiotherapists update their knowledge regarding GTPS. Design: Cross-sectional observational study of physiotherapists. Methods: An online survey was distributed to registered physiotherapists in Australia, NZ and Ireland. Ordinal and nominal data were analysed using frequency counts or mean ranks; medians and interquartile ranges were calculated for numerical data. Comparisons between the three countries were made using Chi-squared analyses for nominal/ordinal data and Kruskal Wallis tests for numerical data. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. Results/findings: Valid responses were received from 361 physiotherapists; 61% were female and 79.8% worked in private practice. Most respondents were very confident in diagnosing GTPS (67.9%) and incorporated a range of symptoms and tests, including validated tests, in their diagnosis. However, many physiotherapists were not commonly using some available validated diagnostic tests (e.g. FABER and FADER-R). Approximately 30% of physiotherapists used imaging to inform assessment, with ultrasound being most preferred. Physiotherapists rated hands-on experience as most valuable for updating their knowledge of GTPS, followed by courses. Conclusion: While most clinicians appear to be using current evidence in their assessment of patients with GTPS, a proportion use suboptimal methods and/or a limited range of diagnostic tests, suggesting that despite their confidence in diagnosis, further knowledge translation may be required. Future research should determine the best methods of facilitating knowledge acquisition and translation of research into practice.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85068459909&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.mendeley.com/research/international-survey-current-physiotherapy-practice-diagnosis-knowledge-translation-greater-trochant

U2 - 10.1016/j.msksp.2019.06.002

DO - 10.1016/j.msksp.2019.06.002

M3 - Article

VL - 43

SP - 122

EP - 126

JO - Musculoskeletal Science and Practice

JF - Musculoskeletal Science and Practice

SN - 1356-689X

ER -