↓ Skip to main content

Practice patterns when treating patients with low back pain: a survey of physical therapists

Overview of attention for article published in Physiotherapy Theory & Practice, February 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
121 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Practice patterns when treating patients with low back pain: a survey of physical therapists
Published in
Physiotherapy Theory & Practice, February 2014
DOI 10.3109/09593985.2013.877547
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Abstract Low back pain (LBP), is a common musculoskeletal problem, affecting 75-85% of adults in their lifetime. Direct costs of LBP in the USA were estimated over 85 billion dollars in 2005 resulting in a significant economic burden for the healthcare system. LBP classification systems and outcome measures are available to guide physical therapy assessments and intervention. However, little is known about which, if any, physical therapists use in clinical practice. The purpose of this study was to identify the use of and barriers to LBP classification systems and outcome measures among physical therapists in one state. A mixed methods study using a cross-sectional cohort design with descriptive qualitative methods was performed. A survey collected both quantitative and qualitative data relevant to classification systems and outcome measures used by physical therapists working with patients with LBP. Physical therapists responded using classification systems designed to direct treatment predominantly. The McKenzie method was the most frequent approach to classify LBP. Barriers to use of classification systems and outcome measures were lack of knowledge, too limiting and time. Classification systems are being used for decision-making in physical therapy practice for patients with LBP. Lack of knowledge and training seems to be the main barrier to the use of classification systems in practice. The Oswestry Disability Index and Numerical Pain Scale were the most commonly used outcome measures. The main barrier to their use was lack of time. Continuing education and reading the literature were identified as important tools to teach evidence-based practice to physical therapists in practice.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 121 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Australia 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Unknown 117 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 24 20%
Student > Bachelor 18 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 9%
Researcher 9 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 7%
Other 22 18%
Unknown 29 24%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 36 30%
Nursing and Health Professions 33 27%
Sports and Recreations 6 5%
Unspecified 4 3%
Psychology 2 2%
Other 9 7%
Unknown 31 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 March 2018.
All research outputs
#24,783,232
of 34,404,538 outputs
Outputs from Physiotherapy Theory & Practice
#909
of 1,357 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#181,211
of 264,639 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Physiotherapy Theory & Practice
#10
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,404,538 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,357 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 264,639 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.