Barriers to the implementation of point-of-care ultrasonography by physiotherapists in haemophilia treatment centres in Canada: a modified Delphi approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background In patients with haemophilia, evidence suggests that the physical examination alone is not sensitive enough to detect small amounts of blood within a joint. Attention has shifted to methods of improving the sensitivity of the physical examination through adding diagnostic modalities such as point-of-care ultrasonography (POC-US). Proficiency with the physical examination and understanding of the role of POC-US are important competencies for physiotherapists. Despite training, implementation of POC-US by physiotherapists in haemophilia treatment centres in Canada has been mixed. Aim Using a theory-based approach, the aim of the current study is to achieve expert consensus regarding the barriers to physiotherapy performed POC-US in haemophilia treatment centres in Canada using a modified Delphi approach. Materials and Methods Using the Knowledge-to-Action Framework and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), a modified Delphi approach was completed using the Modified BARRIERS Scale (MBS). Participants were blinded and consensus was reached over three rounds at the Canadian Hemophilia Society’s annual three-day conference. Results Twenty-two physiotherapists participated; 20 participants completed Round 1, and 21 completed Rounds 2 and 3. Four items of the MBS reached consensus: 1) The physiotherapist does not have time to read research related to POC-US; 2) The physiotherapist is isolated from knowledgeable colleagues with whom to discuss POC-US; 3) Administration will not allow POC-US implementation; 4) There is insufficient time on the job to implement new ideas. All four consensus items can be mapped to one domain of the CFIR: the inner setting. Conclusion The haemophilia treatment centre within a healthcare organisation appears to be an important target for addressing barriers to the implementation of physiotherapy performed POC-US.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".