Normal view MARC view ISBD view

The context of clinical prediction rules and patient rated outcome measures among clinical staff in PLM-CPT affiliated centers / written by Immah Marie R. Pineda, Nean Pauline B. Donasco, Darryl Vince A. Munda, Via Robellie I. Teodoro. 6

By: 4 0 16, [, ] | [, ] |

Contributor(s): 5 6 [] |

Language: Unknown language code Summary language: Unknown language code Original language: Unknown language code Series: ; 46Edition: Description: ix, 121 pagesContent type: text Media type: unmediated Carrier type: volumeISBN: ISSN: 2Other title: 6 []Uniform titles: | | Related works: 1 40 6 []Subject(s): -- 2 -- 0 -- -- | -- 2 -- 0 -- 6 -- | 2 0 -- | -- -- 20 -- | | -- -- -- -- 20 -- | -- -- -- 20 -- --Genre/Form: -- 2 -- Additional physical formats: DDC classification: | LOC classification: | T Fil RM708 | .C668 20182Other classification:

Contents:

Action note: In: Summary: ABSTRACT. Backgound: With the use of research evidence, physical therapists became increasingly confident when it comes to clinical decision-making. Because of these, tools had been developed, had been subjected to validity and reliability measures which helped clinicians assess a certain condition and assisted in identifying the prognosis of patients. Examples of these tools are clinical prediction rules (CPR) & patient-related outcome measures (PROM). Purpose: The study aims to identify the context of clinical prediction rules and patient-related outcome measures among clinical staff in PLM affiliated center of A.Y. 2017-2018. Specifically, on whether they use or not, equivalent term, specific examples, and the reason for usage. Method: This is a cross-sectional study which was conducted during A.Y. 2017-2018. A modification of the survey questionnaire from the study of Hankiemer at al. (2016) was administered to the physical therapists affiliated to PLM-CPT in order to determine the context of CPR and PROM among the subjects. Results: A total of ninety (90) respondents (response rate of (66.7%) completed the survey that measured their familiarity in CPR and PROM. Furthermore, the most frequent equivalent terms used for CPR and PROM were Functional test (12.07%) and Functional assessment test (24.32%), respectively. In line to this, Ottawa Ankle Rules (45.0%) (for CPR) and Oswestry Disability Index (20.5%) (for PROM) were the most commonly used examples relating to favored number of clinical staffs working with musculoskeletal cases. Conclusion: Despite promising results, the study still showed inconsistencies that poses possible issues regarding the perception and knowledge of physical therapists on standardized tests and measures. Given this, the researchers believed that further awareness and proficiency to the knowledge and usage of these tools must be introduced to the physical therapy profession in the country. Other editions:

Tags from this library: No tags from this library for this title. Log in to add tags.

Average rating: 0.0 (0 votes)

Holdings ( 1 )
Title notes
Comments ( 0 )

Item type	Current location	Home library	Collection	Call number	Status	Date due	Barcode	Item holds
Book	PLM	PLM Health Sciences Library	Health Sciences-Thesis	T Fil RM708 .C668 2018 (Browse shelf)	Available		HT481

Total holds: 0

Thesis (Undergraduate) -- Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Maynila, Intramuros, Manila, 2018.;In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Science in Physical Therapy. 56

ABSTRACT. Backgound: With the use of research evidence, physical therapists became increasingly confident when it comes to clinical decision-making. Because of these, tools had been developed, had been subjected to validity and reliability measures which helped clinicians assess a certain condition and assisted in identifying the prognosis of patients. Examples of these tools are clinical prediction rules (CPR) & patient-related outcome measures (PROM). Purpose: The study aims to identify the context of clinical prediction rules and patient-related outcome measures among clinical staff in PLM affiliated center of A.Y. 2017-2018. Specifically, on whether they use or not, equivalent term, specific examples, and the reason for usage. Method: This is a cross-sectional study which was conducted during A.Y. 2017-2018. A modification of the survey questionnaire from the study of Hankiemer at al. (2016) was administered to the physical therapists affiliated to PLM-CPT in order to determine the context of CPR and PROM among the subjects. Results: A total of ninety (90) respondents (response rate of (66.7%) completed the survey that measured their familiarity in CPR and PROM. Furthermore, the most frequent equivalent terms used for CPR and PROM were Functional test (12.07%) and Functional assessment test (24.32%), respectively. In line to this, Ottawa Ankle Rules (45.0%) (for CPR) and Oswestry Disability Index (20.5%) (for PROM) were the most commonly used examples relating to favored number of clinical staffs working with musculoskeletal cases. Conclusion: Despite promising results, the study still showed inconsistencies that poses possible issues regarding the perception and knowledge of physical therapists on standardized tests and measures. Given this, the researchers believed that further awareness and proficiency to the knowledge and usage of these tools must be introduced to the physical therapy profession in the country.

There are no comments for this item.

to post a comment.