Patient-reported quality indicators to evaluate physiotherapy care for hip and/or knee osteoarthritis- development and evaluation of the QUIPA tool.
Aged
Female
Guideline Adherence
/ standards
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Osteoarthritis, Hip
/ rehabilitation
Osteoarthritis, Knee
/ rehabilitation
Patient Reported Outcome Measures
Physical Therapy Modalities
/ standards
Practice Guidelines as Topic
Quality Indicators, Health Care
Quality of Life
Reproducibility of Results
Hip
Knee
Osteoarthritis
Patient-reported
Physiotherapy
Quality indicators
Quality of care
Reliability
Validity
Journal
BMC musculoskeletal disorders
ISSN: 1471-2474
Titre abrégé: BMC Musculoskelet Disord
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968565
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 Apr 2020
01 Apr 2020
Historique:
received:
25
09
2019
accepted:
18
03
2020
entrez:
3
4
2020
pubmed:
3
4
2020
medline:
20
1
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
There is no physiotherapy-specific quality indicator tool available to evaluate physiotherapy care for people with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis (OA). This study aimed to develop a patient-reported quality indicator tool (QUIPA) for physiotherapy management of hip and knee OA and to assess its reliability and validity. To develop the QUIPA tool, quality indicators were initially developed based on clinical guideline recommendations most relevant to physiotherapy practice and those of an existing generic OA quality indicator tool. Draft items were then further refined using patient focus groups. Test-retest reliability, construct validity (hypothesis testing) and criterion validity were then evaluated. Sixty-five people with hip and/or knee OA attended a single physiotherapy consultation and completed the QUIPA tool one, twelve- and thirteen-weeks after. Physiotherapists (n = 9) completed the tool post-consultation. Patient test-retest reliability was assessed between weeks twelve and thirteen. Construct validity was assessed with three predefined hypotheses and criterion validity was based on agreement between physiotherapists and participants at week one. A draft list of 23 clinical guideline recommendations most relevant to physiotherapy was developed. Following feedback from three patient focus groups, the final QUIPA tool contained 18 items (three subscales) expressed in lay language. The test-retest reliability estimates (Cohen's Kappa) for single items ranged from 0.30-0.83 with observed agreement of 64-94%. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for the Assessment and Management Planning subscale was 0.70 (0.54, 0.81), Core Recommended Treatments subscale was 0.84 (0.75, 0.90), Adjunctive Treatments subscale was 0.70 (0.39, 0.87) and for the total QUIPA score was 0.80 (0.69, 0.88). All predefined hypotheses regarding construct validity were confirmed. However, agreement between physiotherapists and participants for single items showed large measurement error (Cohen's Kappa estimates ranged from - 0.04-0.59) with the ICC (95% CI) for the total score being 0.11 (- 0.14, 0.34). The QUIPA tool showed acceptable test-retest reliability for subscales and total score but inadequate reliability for individual items. Construct validity was confirmed but criterion validity for individual items, subscales and the total score was inadequate. Further research is needed to refine the QUIPA tool to improve its clinimetric properties before implementation.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
There is no physiotherapy-specific quality indicator tool available to evaluate physiotherapy care for people with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis (OA). This study aimed to develop a patient-reported quality indicator tool (QUIPA) for physiotherapy management of hip and knee OA and to assess its reliability and validity.
METHODS
METHODS
To develop the QUIPA tool, quality indicators were initially developed based on clinical guideline recommendations most relevant to physiotherapy practice and those of an existing generic OA quality indicator tool. Draft items were then further refined using patient focus groups. Test-retest reliability, construct validity (hypothesis testing) and criterion validity were then evaluated. Sixty-five people with hip and/or knee OA attended a single physiotherapy consultation and completed the QUIPA tool one, twelve- and thirteen-weeks after. Physiotherapists (n = 9) completed the tool post-consultation. Patient test-retest reliability was assessed between weeks twelve and thirteen. Construct validity was assessed with three predefined hypotheses and criterion validity was based on agreement between physiotherapists and participants at week one.
RESULTS
RESULTS
A draft list of 23 clinical guideline recommendations most relevant to physiotherapy was developed. Following feedback from three patient focus groups, the final QUIPA tool contained 18 items (three subscales) expressed in lay language. The test-retest reliability estimates (Cohen's Kappa) for single items ranged from 0.30-0.83 with observed agreement of 64-94%. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for the Assessment and Management Planning subscale was 0.70 (0.54, 0.81), Core Recommended Treatments subscale was 0.84 (0.75, 0.90), Adjunctive Treatments subscale was 0.70 (0.39, 0.87) and for the total QUIPA score was 0.80 (0.69, 0.88). All predefined hypotheses regarding construct validity were confirmed. However, agreement between physiotherapists and participants for single items showed large measurement error (Cohen's Kappa estimates ranged from - 0.04-0.59) with the ICC (95% CI) for the total score being 0.11 (- 0.14, 0.34).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The QUIPA tool showed acceptable test-retest reliability for subscales and total score but inadequate reliability for individual items. Construct validity was confirmed but criterion validity for individual items, subscales and the total score was inadequate. Further research is needed to refine the QUIPA tool to improve its clinimetric properties before implementation.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32238148
doi: 10.1186/s12891-020-03221-5
pii: 10.1186/s12891-020-03221-5
pmc: PMC7114805
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Validation Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
202Subventions
Organisme : Department of Health
ID : KMRF-2014-03-002
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Department of Health
ID : RP-PG-0407-10386
Pays : United Kingdom
Références
Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2014 Mar;22(3):363-88
pubmed: 24462672
Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2017 Jul;25(7):1010-1025
pubmed: 28232144
Physiotherapy. 2010 Dec;96(4):289-95
pubmed: 21056163
Rheumatology (Oxford). 2015 May;54(5):844-53
pubmed: 25336538
Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2013 Jul;65(7):1043-51
pubmed: 23401461
Qual Saf Health Care. 2002 Dec;11(4):358-64
pubmed: 12468698
BMJ Open. 2016 Aug 05;6(8):e012331
pubmed: 27496243
Phys Ther. 2016 Jan;96(1):90-100
pubmed: 26089040
Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2011 Nov;19(11):1270-85
pubmed: 21907813
Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2018 Oct;26(10):1300-1310
pubmed: 30231991
Can J Cardiol. 2012 Jan-Feb;28(1):110-8
pubmed: 22154233
J Clin Epidemiol. 2007 Jan;60(1):34-42
pubmed: 17161752
J Eval Clin Pract. 2015 Oct;21(5):782-9
pubmed: 26083547
Phys Ther. 2018 Jun 1;98(6):461-470
pubmed: 29514327
J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2019 Jul;49(7):501-512
pubmed: 31258044
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009 Jul 08;(3):MR000008
pubmed: 19588449
Biometrics. 1977 Mar;33(1):159-74
pubmed: 843571
Physiother Can. 2017;69(1):30-37
pubmed: 28154442
Implement Sci. 2009 Jul 03;4:37
pubmed: 19575790
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2011 Jan 07;12:3
pubmed: 21214921
Acta Reumatol Port. 2011 Jul-Sep;36(3):268-81
pubmed: 22113602
Arthritis Rheum. 2004 Apr 15;51(2):193-202
pubmed: 15077259
Musculoskeletal Care. 2016 Dec;14(4):219-232
pubmed: 26799718
Res Involv Engagem. 2016 Mar 17;2:5
pubmed: 29062506
Ann Rheum Dis. 2015 Mar;74(3):490-8
pubmed: 24288012
BMJ Qual Saf. 2018 Oct;27(10):858-864
pubmed: 29666310
Musculoskeletal Care. 2009 Mar;7(1):45-56
pubmed: 18972322
Ann Rheum Dis. 2013 Jul;72(7):1125-35
pubmed: 23595142
J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2013 Sep;21(9):571-6
pubmed: 23996988
Qual Life Res. 2003 May;12(3):229-38
pubmed: 12769135
Phys Ther. 2005 Mar;85(3):257-68
pubmed: 15733050