Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT04009369

Impacts of Physiotherapy Services in a Quebec Emergency Department

Emergency departments (ED) in several countries integrated physiotherapists in order to reduce wait times for patients with musculoskeletal disorders (MSKD). These initiatives have indeed reduced wait times, length of stay, time waited before seeing a professional and the prescription of unnecessary consultations and diagnostic tests. In Canada, such initiatives are marginal and their effects have not been studied.

The objectives of the project are to evaluate the effects of physiotherapy management of patients with MSKD in ED compared to usual practice on clinical course of patients, use of services and resources, and waiting time and length of stay in ED. The hypothesis is that patients presenting with a MSKD to the ED with direct access to a physiotherapist will have better clinical outcomes and that use of services, waiting time, and length of stay are going to be inferior to those of the EP group.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Conditions

Musculoskeletal Pain Muscular Diseases Musculoskeletal Diseases Musculoskeletal Injury Neurologic Manifestations Pain Pathological Conditions, Signs and Symptoms Signs and Symptoms

Age range

18 year–80 year

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

Centre Hospitalier de l'Université Laval (CHUL)

Québec, Quebec, G1V 4G2, Canada

About this study

Background and rationale: Emergency departments (ED) in several countries integrated physiotherapists, which led, for patients with musculoskeletal disorders (MSKD), to a reduction in wait times, length of stay, time waited before seeing a professional and the prescription of unnecessary consultations and diagnostic tests. Furthermore, early access to physiotherapy is associated with a decrease in pain and psychological symptoms and decreased risks of developing persistent pain. In Canada, such initiatives are still marginal and their effects have not been studied.

Objectives: Evaluate the effects of direct access physiotherapy management of patients with MSKD in the ED compared to the usual management by the emergency physician on clinical course of patients (pain, quality of life and disability) and use of services and resources at one and three months, and waiting time and length of stay in the ED.

Methods: A randomized controlled trial is currently in progress at the Centre hospitalier de l'Université Laval (CHUL). Two groups of 50 participants each are recruited over a six months period: one group with direct access to a physiotherapist (PT) in the ED and one control group with the usual access care to the emergency physician. Data is extracted from the patients' medical record, administrative data from the ED, self-administered forms given to the patients during their ED stay and either electronic or phone follow-ups (1 and 3 months). Data will be analysed using descriptive (demographic and clinical profiles) and inferential statistics (repeated ANOVA between groups across time points and Student T tests for independent samples).

Importance of potential findings for MSK health: ED overcrowding causes prolonged lengths of stay, increased rates of patient leaving without being seen, increased medical errors, increased mortality among ambulatory and non-ambulatory patients and decreased patient satisfaction. This project will measure the effects of integrating PTs into the ED in a Canadian hospital setting and help identify ways to improve the current services offered to patients with a MSKD presenting to the ED. Direct access to PT may improve musculoskeletal health outcomes and support positive patient experience.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

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

Inclusion criteria

  • Triage category 3, 4 or 5
  • Discharged home with a minor MSKD after ED care
  • Able to consent
  • Able to understand French and to complete the questionnaire either verbally or in writing

Exclusion criteria

  • Major MSKD requiring urgent care
  • Presence of a red flag or an unstable clinical condition
  • Living in a long-term care facility

Treatment and study plan

Direct access to a PT

Other

Direct access to a PT in the ED immediately after triage and prior to physician assessment.

Primary outcomes

  1. Level of Pain: Numeric Pain Rating Scale

    Time frame: Baseline, 1 and 3 months

    Scale ranging from 0 to 10 where 0 means no pain at all and 10 means the worst pain ever.

  2. Pain Interference on Function: Brief Pain Inventory

    Time frame: Baseline, 1 and 3 months

    List of 10 items (work, sleep, general activity, etc.) represented on a scale ranging from 0 to 10 where 0 means "Does Not Interfere" and 10 means "Completely Interferes". Subscales are averaged and the resulting score is out of 10. A higher score means a higher interference of pain on function.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Pain Catastrophizing: Pain Catastrophizing Scale

    Time frame: Baseline

    List of 13 items (thoughts and feelings about pain) represented on a scale ranging from 0 to 4 where 0 means "Not at all" and 4 means "All the time". Subscales are summed and the resulting score is out of 52. A higher score means a higher tendency to catastrophise pain.

  2. Interventions received by the participants : Standardized Form

    Time frame: Baseline, 1 and 3 months

    Form were every intervention received by the patient was checked as a "Yes" or "No" answer. (Advice, medication, technical aids, referral to another health professional, etc.)

  3. Diagnostic Tests : Standardized Form

    Time frame: Baseline, 1 and 3 months

    Form were every diagnostic test received by the patient was checked as a "Yes" or "No" answer. (X-ray, MRI, CT Scan, ultrasound, etc.)

  4. Consultations with Another Health Professional : Standardized Form

    Time frame: Baseline, 1 and 3 months

    Form were every consultation being prescribed to the patient was checked as a "Yes" or "No" answer.

  5. Satisfaction: Visit-Specific Satisfaction Instrument

    Time frame: Baseline

    List of 7 items (Answers to your questions, Technical skills of the healthcare provider, etc.) represented on a scale ranging from 1 to 5 where 1 means "Excellent" and 5 means "Poor". Subscales are transformed in results out of 100 (1 = 100% and 5 = 0%), averaged and the resulting score is out of 100%. A higher score means higher satisfaction.

  6. Wait Time

    Time frame: Baseline

    Difference between beginning of the intervention and time of arrival between groups during their ED visit

  7. Length of Stay

    Time frame: Baseline

    Difference between departure time and time of arrival between groups during their ED visit

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Rose Gagnon

Other

Collaborators

  • CHU de Quebec-Universite Laval
  • Integrated University Health and Social Services Center of the Capitale-Nationale
  • Laval University

Registry information

Official study title

Impacts of Physiotherapy Services in a Quebec Emergency Department - Randomized Clinical Trial

Important dates

Study start
2018
Primary completion
2019
Study completion
2019
First posted
Jul 5, 2019
Registry last updated
Oct 28, 2020

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.

Related clinical trials

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