Using Outcome Measures in Daily Practice: Development and Evaluation of an Implementation Strategy for Physiotherapists in the Netherlands

ABSTRACT Purpose: To describe the development of an educational programme for physiotherapists in the Netherlands, two toolkits of measurement instruments, and the evaluation of an implementation strategy. Method: The study used a controlled pre- and post-measurement design. A tailored educational programme for the use of outcome measures was developed that consisted of four training sessions and two toolkits of measurement instruments. Of 366 invited physiotherapists, 265 followed the educational programme (response rate 72.4%), and 235 randomly chosen control physiotherapists did not (28% response rate). The outcomes measured were participants' general attitude toward measurement instruments, their ability to choose measurement instruments, their use of measurement instruments, the applicability of the educational programme, and the changes in physiotherapy practice achieved as a result of the programme. Results: Consistent (not occasional) use of measurement instruments increased from 26% to 41% in the intervention group; in the control group, use remained almost the same (45% vs 48%). Difficulty in choosing an appropriate measurement instrument decreased from 3.5 to 2.7 on a 5-point Likert-type scale. Finally, 91% of respondents found the educational programme useful, and 82% reported that it changed their physiotherapy practice. Conclusions: The educational programme and toolkits were useful and had a positive effect on physiotherapists' ability to choose among many possible outcome measures.

[1]  R. Swinkels,et al.  Current use and barriers and facilitators for implementation of standardised measures in physical therapy in the Netherlands , 2011, BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders.

[2]  S. Hanna,et al.  Using knowledge brokers to facilitate the uptake of pediatric measurement tools into clinical practice: a before-after intervention study , 2010, Implementation science : IS.

[3]  M. Ketelaar,et al.  Promoting the Use of Measurement Tools in Practice: A Mixed-Methods Study of the Activities and Experiences of Physical Therapist Knowledge Brokers , 2010, Physical Therapy.

[4]  A. Beurskens,et al.  Implementation of Measurement Instruments in Physical Therapist Practice: Development of a Tailored Strategy , 2010, Physical Therapy.

[5]  D. Jette,et al.  Use of Standardized Outcome Measures in Physical Therapist Practice: Perceptions and Applications , 2009, Physical Therapy.

[6]  R. V. van Peppen,et al.  Outcome measures in physiotherapy management of patients with stroke: a survey into self-reported use, and barriers to and facilitators for use. , 2008, Physiotherapy research international : the journal for researchers and clinicians in physical therapy.

[7]  W. Taylor,et al.  Factors Influencing the Use of Outcome Measures for Patients With Low Back Pain: A Survey of New Zealand Physical Therapists , 2008, Physical Therapy.

[8]  M. Ketelaar,et al.  The Challenge of Moving Evidence-Based Measures into Clinical Practice: Lessons in Knowledge Translation , 2008, Physical & occupational therapy in pediatrics.

[9]  E. Hendriks,et al.  Multifaceted strategies may increase implementation of physiotherapy clinical guidelines: a systematic review. , 2008, The Australian journal of physiotherapy.

[10]  J. Cosby,et al.  Resilience Engineering: Concepts and Precepts , 2006, Quality and Safety in Health Care.

[11]  M. Davidson,et al.  Monitoring the change: current trends in outcome measure usage in physiotherapy. , 2006, Manual therapy.

[12]  J. Grimshaw,et al.  From best evidence to best practice: effective implementation of change in patients' care , 2003, The Lancet.

[13]  Jeremy M. Grimshaw,et al.  Changing Provider Behavior: An Overview of Systematic Reviews of Interventions , 2001, Medical care.

[14]  L. Seldin.  With the society , 1976, The New York journal of dentistry.