Stroke
Conditions
Keywords
Clinical Reasoning, Physiotherapists
Brief summary
The goal of this study is to find out what clinical reasoning process physiotherapists undergo when observing hemiplegic patients gait.
Detailed description
Physiotherapists don't usually use any assessments to evaluate gait but observe it without an instrument. The questions in this study are: * what abnormalities can physiotherapists detect when observing a patient walking? * what do they consider the main problem that has a negative effect on the patient's walking? * what hypothesis do they generate? * how is the inter-rater reliability for the main problem and the hypothesis?
Interventions
OTHERNo intervention
No intervention
Sponsors
Technical University of Bern
Study design
Observational model
OTHER
Time perspective
OTHER
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* chartered physiotherapists * physiotherapists in training * working with stroke patients
Exclusion criteria
\- other languages than German
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Number of Main Problems Observed | up to 2 months | This outcome is a result of the second part of the Questionnaire: 1) What Gait Abnormalities do You See? 2) What do You Consider the Main Problem (1 Sentence) 3) What is Your Hypothesis (Max. 3) By consensus the three independent researchers identified the main statements from the sentences written. Items were afterwards categorised. Finally the frequency of each item was analysed globally and for each patient. |
| Number of Gait Abnormalities Observed | up to 2 months | The questionnaire will be the basis of this study as it will be the basis for open coding. It is handed out to 54 observers (=physiotherapists) and will be filled in 6 times (for 6 patient videos). The questionnaire consists of 3 main questions: 1. what gait abnormalities do you see? 2. What do you consider the main problem (1 sentence) 3. what is your hypothesis (max. 3) The question one delivers different items (each new observation is a new item) that were determined patient by patient and rater by rater by three independent researchers. They were then listed and categorised by consensus. Finally, the frequency of each item was analysed globally and for each patient. |
| Number of Hypotheses Observed | up to 2 months | This outcome is a result of the third part of the questionnaire: 1) What Gait Abnormalities do You See? 2) What do You Consider the Main Problem (1 Sentence) 3) What is Your Hypothesis (Max. 3) By consensus the three independent researchers identified and categorised all the listed hypotheses from question number three of the questionnaire. After that the use frequency of each item was analysed globally and for each patient. |
Participant flow
Participants by arm
| Arm | Count |
|---|---|
| PT's Working With Stroke Patients in NW-Switzerland Physiotherapists from Bruderholzspital, RehaB Basel, Klinik Tschugg, Reha Rheinfelden, RehaClinic Zurzach | 54 |
| Total | 54 |
Baseline characteristics
| Characteristic | PT's Working With Stroke Patients in NW-Switzerland |
|---|---|
| Age, Categorical <=18 years | 0 Participants |
| Age, Categorical >=65 years | 0 Participants |
| Age, Categorical Between 18 and 65 years | 54 Participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Female | 45 Participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Male | 9 Participants |
Adverse events
| Event type | EG000 affected / at risk |
|---|---|
| deaths Total, all-cause mortality | 0 / 54 |
| other Total, other adverse events | 0 / 54 |
| serious Total, serious adverse events | 0 / 54 |
Outcome results
Primary
Number of Gait Abnormalities Observed
The questionnaire will be the basis of this study as it will be the basis for open coding. It is handed out to 54 observers (=physiotherapists) and will be filled in 6 times (for 6 patient videos). The questionnaire consists of 3 main questions: 1. what gait abnormalities do you see? 2. What do you consider the main problem (1 sentence) 3. what is your hypothesis (max. 3) The question one delivers different items (each new observation is a new item) that were determined patient by patient and rater by rater by three independent researchers. They were then listed and categorised by consensus. Finally, the frequency of each item was analysed globally and for each patient.
Time frame: up to 2 months
| Arm | Measure | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|
| PT's Working With Stroke Patients in NW-Switzerland | Number of Gait Abnormalities Observed | 177 number of different gait abnormalities |
Primary
Number of Hypotheses Observed
This outcome is a result of the third part of the questionnaire: 1) What Gait Abnormalities do You See? 2) What do You Consider the Main Problem (1 Sentence) 3) What is Your Hypothesis (Max. 3) By consensus the three independent researchers identified and categorised all the listed hypotheses from question number three of the questionnaire. After that the use frequency of each item was analysed globally and for each patient.
Time frame: up to 2 months
| Arm | Measure | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|
| PT's Working With Stroke Patients in NW-Switzerland | Number of Hypotheses Observed | 119 Number of different hypotheses |
Primary
Number of Main Problems Observed
This outcome is a result of the second part of the Questionnaire: 1) What Gait Abnormalities do You See? 2) What do You Consider the Main Problem (1 Sentence) 3) What is Your Hypothesis (Max. 3) By consensus the three independent researchers identified the main statements from the sentences written. Items were afterwards categorised. Finally the frequency of each item was analysed globally and for each patient.
Time frame: up to 2 months
| Arm | Measure | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|
| PT's Working With Stroke Patients in NW-Switzerland | Number of Main Problems Observed | 93 number of different main problems |