Clinical Reasoning Process of Physiotherapists When Observing Hemiplegic Gait

The goal of this study is to find out what clinical reasoning process physiotherapists undergo when observing hemiplegic patients gait.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Conditions

Stroke Brain Diseases Cardiovascular Diseases Central Nervous System Diseases Cerebrovascular Disorders Nervous System Diseases Vascular Diseases

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Observational

About this study

Physiotherapists don't usually use any assessments to evaluate gait but observe it without an instrument. The questions in this study are:

what abnormalities can physiotherapists detect when observing a patient walking?
what do they consider the main problem that has a negative effect on the patient's walking?
what hypothesis do they generate?
how is the inter-rater reliability for the "main problem" and the hypothesis?

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: Yes

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

chartered physiotherapists
physiotherapists in training
working with stroke patients

Exclusion criteria

other languages than German

Treatment and study plan

No intervention

Other

No intervention

Primary outcomes

Number of Gait Abnormalities Observed

Time frame: up to 2 months
The questionnaire will be the basis of this study as it will be the basis for open coding. It is handed out to 54 observers (=physiotherapists) and will be filled in 6 times (for 6 patient videos).

The questionnaire consists of 3 main questions:
- what gait abnormalities do you see?
- What do you consider the main problem (1 sentence)
- what is your hypothesis (max. 3) The question one delivers different items (each new observation is a new item) that were determined patient by patient and rater by rater by three independent researchers. They were then listed and categorised by consensus. Finally, the frequency of each item was analysed globally and for each patient.
Number of Main Problems Observed

Time frame: up to 2 months

This outcome is a result of the second part of the Questionnaire: 1) What Gait Abnormalities do You See? 2) What do You Consider the Main Problem (1 Sentence) 3) What is Your Hypothesis (Max. 3) By consensus the three independent researchers identified the main statements from the sentences written. Items were afterwards categorised. Finally the frequency of each item was analysed globally and for each patient.
Number of Hypotheses Observed

Time frame: up to 2 months

This outcome is a result of the third part of the questionnaire: 1) What Gait Abnormalities do You See? 2) What do You Consider the Main Problem (1 Sentence) 3) What is Your Hypothesis (Max. 3) By consensus the three independent researchers identified and categorised all the listed hypotheses from question number three of the questionnaire. After that the use frequency of each item was analysed globally and for each patient.

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Technical University of Bern

Other

Registry information

Important dates

Study start: 2015
Primary completion: 2015
Study completion: 2015
First posted: Jul 21, 2015
Registry last updated: Aug 2, 2017

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.

Completed