Current practice of physical therapists in outpatient stroke rehabilitation: a cross-sectional survey in Baden-Württemberg and Thuringia / Arbeitsweise von Physiotherapeut*innen in der ambulanten Schlaganfallrehabilitation: eine Querschnittsumfrage in Baden-Württemberg und Thüringen
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective Guidelines recommend task-oriented training and the use of standardized assessments to improve stroke-related mobility deficits. However, the German outpatient physical therapy prescription catalogue does not include these recommendations resulting in a possible gap between guideline recommendations and clinical practice. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to describe physical therapy practice patterns of stroke-related mobility deficits in the outpatient setting exemplified by the states Baden-Württemberg and Thuringia. Methods Using an online survey, physical therapists treating people with stroke in outpatient settings in Baden-Württemberg and Thuringia were recruited. The questionnaire was developed using a multi-step procedure. Using a case vignette and open-ended questions, preferred evaluation and treatment methods were assessed. Data were analyzed using content analysis and descriptive statistics. Results Data from 63 physical therapists were included in the analysis. Answers to the open questions showed a wide range of different citations. Of 186 citations on evaluation methods, 28 (15,1 %) were classified as “standardized assessments”, while 158 citations (84,9 %) were classified as “basic physical therapy evaluation (non-standardized)”. Standardized assessments were cited by 25% of participants. Of 182 citations on treatment methods, 69 (35,2%) were classified as “traditional therapies”. These traditional therapies were cited by 81 % of participants. Task-oriented training was not cited. Discussion Despite the small sample size our data confirm the insufficient guideline use in German physical therapy and contribute results on practice patterns in outpatient stroke settings. These results will be used to initiate theory-based implementation strategies aiming to optimize physical therapy for people with stroke.
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 | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".