Maria Elvén

A clinical reasoning model focused on clients’ behaviour change with reference to physiotherapists: its multiphase development and validation

Abstract Background and purpose: A biopsychosocial approach and behaviour change strategies have long been proposed to serve as a basis for addressing current multifaceted health problems. This emphasis has implications for clinical reasoning of health professionals. This study’s aim was to develop and validate a conceptual model to guide physiotherapists’ clinical reasoning focused on clients’ behaviour change. Methods: Phase 1 consisted of the exploration of existing research and the research team’s experiences and knowledge. Phases 2a and 2b consisted of validation and refinement of the model based on input from physiotherapy students in two focus groups (n = 5 per group) and from experts in behavioural medicine (n = 9). Results: Phase 1 generated theoretical and evidence bases for the first version of a model. Phases 2a and 2b established the validity and value of the model. The final model described clinical reasoning focused on clients’ behaviour change as a cognitive, reflective, collaborative and iterative process with multiple interrelated levels that included input from the client and physiotherapist, a functional behavioural analysis of the activity-related target behaviour and the selection of strategies for behaviour change. Conclusions: This unique model, theory- and evidence-informed, has been developed to help physiotherapists to apply clinical reasoning systematically in the process of behaviour change with their clients.

Factors influencing physical therapists’ clinical reasoning: qualitative systematic review and meta-synthesis

Background: The capacity of physical therapists to reason effectively in patient management is essential to maximizing outcomes. Although conceptual frameworks of clinical reasoning exist, their theoretical foundations are insufficiently validated to establish those factors that are paramount in guiding physical therapists’ clinical reasoning. Studies on how physical therapists clinically reason constitute important means of identifying constructs of such reasoning. Objective: This systematic review aimed to synthesize and interpret the findings of qualitative studies designed to examine factors that are inherent in physical therapists’ clinical reasoning with respect to their knowledge, experiences, and practices. Methods: Searches of studies were carried out in four databases, gray literature, and reference lists. Two reviewers independently assessed methodological quality of the studies using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP) and performed the analysis: extraction and comparative appraisal of findings, identification of themes, reciprocal translation synthesis, and identification of categories and subcategories. Results: Ten studies were included. Four themes of factors influencing physical therapists’ clinical reasoning emerged, namely, Physical therapist as a source, Patient as a source, Elements of the reasoning process, and Context. Conclusions: The identified themes validated some constructs underlying existing clinical reasoning frameworks. Most influencing factors were related to the physical therapist, which highlights opportunities to improve effective reasoning at this level. The notion that this process is recurrent, multifaceted, and contextual lends itself to changing in accordance with the needs of the patient, consistent with a biopsychosocial perspective. How clinicians weigh biomedical and psychosocial elements in their reasoning however warrants further study.

Integration of behavioral medicine competencies into physiotherapy curriculum in an exemplary Swedish program: rationale, process, and review

ABSTRACT In 2004, Mälardalen University, Sweden, introduced a new undergraduate entry-level physiotherapy program. Program developers constructed the curriculum with behavioral medicine content that reflected the contemporary definition and values of the physiotherapy profession aligning it with current best practices, evidence, and the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF). The new curriculum conceptualized movement and function as modifiable behaviors in that they reflect behavioral contingencies, perceptions, beliefs, and lifestyle factors as well as pathophysiology and environmental factors. The purpose of this article is to describe how one university accordingly structured its new curriculum and its review. We describe the rationale for the curriculum’s behavioral medicine content and competencies, its development and implementation, challenges, long-term outcomes, and its related research enterprise. We conclude that physiotherapy practiced by our graduates augments that taught in other programs based on accreditation reviews. With their expanded practice scope, graduates are systematically practicing within the constructs of health and function conceptualized within the ICF. Our intent in sharing our experience is to exemplify one university’s initiative to best prepare students with respect to maximizing physiotherapy outcomes as well as establish a dialogue regarding minimum standards of behavioral medicine competencies in physiotherapy education and practice.

Development and initial evaluation of an instrument to assess physiotherapists’ clinical reasoning focused on clients’ behavior change

ABSTRACT Background and Aim: A systematically developed and evaluated instrument is needed to support investigations of physiotherapists’ clinical reasoning integrated with the process of clients’ behavior change. This study’s aim was to develop an instrument to assess physiotherapy students’ and physiotherapists’ clinical reasoning focused on clients’ activity-related behavior and behavior change, and initiate its evaluation, including feasibility and content validity. Methods: The study was conducted in three phases: 1) determination of instrument structure and item generation, based on a model, guidelines for assessing clinical reasoning, and existing measures; 2) cognitive interviews with five physiotherapy students to evaluate item understanding and feasibility; and 3) a Delphi process with 18 experts to evaluate content relevance. Results: Phase 1 resulted in an instrument with four domains: Physiotherapist; Input from client; Functional behavioral analysis; and Strategies for behavior change. The instrument consists of case scenarios followed by items in which key features are identified, prioritized, or interpreted. Phase 2 resulted in revisions of problems and approval of feasibility. Phase 3 demonstrated high level of consensus regarding the instrument’s content relevance. Conclusions: This feasible and content-validated instrument shows potential for use in investigations of physiotherapy students’ and physiotherapists’ clinical reasoning, however continued development and testing are needed.