Fostering Adherence to Evidence-Based Care in the Management of Musculoskeletal Shoulder Pain: A Mixed-Methods Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
OBJECTIVE: The objective was to identify the priorities of individuals with musculoskeletal shoulder pain and their health care providers (HCPs) that are perceived to foster multistakeholder adherence to evidence-based recommendations. METHODS: The study used a mixed-methods design, informed by concept mapping. Patients with shoulder pain (ie, ≥6 weeks) and HCPs involved in their care (recruited via social media, email, etc) were invited to complete an initial survey to identify perceived priorities to foster adherence to evidence-based recommendations. Preliminary data sorting resulted in a final priority list, with a subset (n = 20) of respondents rating their importance using a Likert scale. A public and patient involvement (PPI) panel (N = 8) assisted in this rating phase, further sorting of priorities based on thematic similarities (ie, into categories and then domains), analysis, interpretation, and developing a concept map illustrating relationships between them. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty-four participants (HCPs = 133; patients = 21) responded to the initial survey, generating 77 priorities, grouped into 13 categories, and then into 3 domains: (1) Education, (2) Patient-centered care, and (3) Health care communication. Patients prioritized categories relating to the provision of a specific diagnosis, the establishment of a strong therapeutic relationship, and the need for education on progress and recovery timelines, as well as treatment options. HCPs prioritized these same educational categories, also prioritizing the need for tailoring exercise therapy and providing a unified message on best management. PPI panelists identified education on treatment options coupled with a strong therapeutic alliance and a unified message on best management to be of pivotal importance in fostering adherence. Panelists also stressed that future knowledge translation resources must provide tailored education. CONCLUSION: HCPs and patients agree on the need to prioritize education related to progress and recovery timelines as well as treatment options, with a strong therapeutic alliance and a unified message on best management also considered of pivotal importance for adherence to evidence-based recommendations. IMPACT: To the knowledge of the authors, this is the first study, including a broad range of stakeholder groups spanning across 11 different countries, to explore the priorities that stakeholders perceived to support stricter adherence to evidence-based recommendations for musculoskeletal shoulder pain, with the relationship between these priorities visually illustrated using a concept map. Patients and HCPs were united in their prioritization of education relating to expected progress and recovery timelines, as well as treatment options and supporting evidence. Stakeholders also identified the need for greater emphasis to be placed on establishing a therapeutic relationship and on integrating shared decision-making into clinical practice to further facilitate adherence. Education relating to treatment options and supporting evidence, a strong therapeutic relationship, and a unified message on best management were perceived by the PPI panel as being pivotal in facilitating adherence to evidence-based treatment. The findings of this study highlight the need for improved tailoring of educational resources for shoulder pain, as well as more cohesive messaging from health care providers, both assisting in supporting first-line treatments, such as exercise therapy, for musculoskeletal shoulder pain.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».