Use of outcome measures by UK allied health professionals: a cross-sectional online survey

Author:

Young Joshua1,Bowers Roy2

Affiliation:

1. Paediatric Orthotic Centre, John Florence Limited, Lewes, UK

2. National Centre for Prosthetics and Orthotics Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK

Abstract

Background/Aims Outcome measures are key tool for assessing the effects of healthcare on health status, but little is currently known about their use by allied health professionals in the UK. This study aims to explore the use of outcome measures by allied health professionals, with a view to informing future research and developing clinical training resources. Methods An online survey regarding use of outcome measure was developed, including 28 questions covering demographic and professional characteristics, frequency of use of outcome measures, perceptions of and barriers to use and confidence in use. The survey was distributed to UK allied health professionals by contacting relevant professional bodies and using social media. Comparisons between groups were made with the Mann-Whitney U test, Chi square or comparisons of column means. Significance was set at 0.05. Results Responses from 107 allied health professionals were analysed, representing 13 of the 14 allied health professional groups across the UK. Most respondents (85%) used outcome measures, with 37% reporting frequency of use as ‘always’ and 33% as ‘often’. Most respondents (75%) used informal approaches to interpret outcome measure data, while 17% used normative data and 15% used minimal clinically important difference values. The most commonly reported barriers were lack of time (70%), administrative support (47%), resources (41%) and training (35%). Levels of pre-registration and post-registration training in outcome measures were low (28% and 56% respectively). Postgraduate training in outcome measures was significantly associated with frequent use of outcome measures (P=0.010). Conclusions Most UK allied health professionals use outcome measures regularly, but few use formal approaches to interpret the data collected. This study highlights a need for training for pre-registration and post-registration allied health professionals in the use of outcome measures.

Publisher

Mark Allen Group

Subject

Health Policy,Leadership and Management

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3