↓ Skip to main content

Physical therapists and importance of work participation in patients with musculoskeletal disorders: a focus group study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
13 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
94 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.
Title
Physical therapists and importance of work participation in patients with musculoskeletal disorders: a focus group study
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, May 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12891-017-1546-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nathan Hutting, Wiebke Oswald, J Bart Staal, Josephine A Engels, Elvira Nouwens, Maria WG Nijhuis van-der Sanden, Yvonne F Heerkens

Abstract

Musculoskeletal disorders are a major health problem resulting in negative effects on wellbeing and substantial costs to society. Work participation is associated with positive benefits for both mental and physical health. Potentially, generalist physical therapists (GPTs) can play an important role in reducing absenteeism, presenteeism and associated costs in patients with musculoskeletal disorders. However, work participation is often insufficiently addressed within generalist physical therapy practice (GPTP). Therefore, this study evaluates whether GPTs take work participation into account as a determining factor in patients with musculoskeletal disorders, and how this might be improved. This qualitative study consisted of seven focus groups involving 30 participants: 21 GPTs and 9 occupational physical therapists (OPTs). Based on an interview guide, participants were asked how they integrate work participation within their practice, how they collaborate with other professionals, and how GPTs can improve integration of the patient's work within their practice. Although participants recognized the importance of work participation, they mentioned that the integration of this item in their GPTP could be improved. Generally, GPTs place insufficient priority on work participation. Moreover, there is a lack of cooperation between the generalist physical therapist and (other) occupational healthcare providers (including OPTs), and the borderlines/differences between generalist physcial therapy and occupational health physcial therapy were sometimes unclear. GPTs showed a lack of knowledge and a need for additional information about several important work-related factors (e.g. work content, physical and psychosocial working conditions, terms of employment). Although a patient's work is important, GPTs take insufficient account of work participation as a determining factor in the treatment of patients with musculoskeletal disorders. GPTs often lack specific knowledge about work-related factors, and there is insufficient cooperation between OPTs and other occupational healthcare providers. The integration of work participation within GPTP, and the cooperation between GPTs and other occupational healthcare providers, show room for improvement.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 94 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 1 1%
Unknown 93 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 13%
Student > Bachelor 9 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 6%
Other 5 5%
Other 21 22%
Unknown 34 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 22 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 11%
Engineering 3 3%
Psychology 3 3%
Social Sciences 3 3%
Other 16 17%
Unknown 37 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 05 June 2022.
All research outputs
#3,600,102
of 22,973,051 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#709
of 4,088 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#64,256
of 310,607 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#19
of 87 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,973,051 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,088 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its peers.
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 310,607 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 87 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.