17Jun 2019

CLINICAL DECISION MAKING FOR USE OF ELECTRO-PHYSICAL AGENTS BY PHYSICAL-THERAPY INTERNS AND POST- GRADUATE STUDENTS OF AHMEDABAD, INDIA: A CROSS-SECTIONAL SURVEY.

  • BPT, SBB College of Physiotherapy, VS Hospital Campus.
  • MPT(Rehab), Guide for PGs, Sr. Lecturer SBB College of Physiotherapy, VS Hospital Campus.
  • Abstract
  • Keywords
  • References
  • Cite This Article as
  • Corresponding Author

Introduction: Electro-physical agents (EPA) are the electrical or thermal modalities used along with exercise therapy. The aim of the study was to understand the factors affecting the clinical decision making by newly practicing Physical-therapy Interns and Post-Graduate students, while choosing EPA as a part of treatment. Method: A cross-sectional survey was conducted at Physical-therapy college. Hundred Physical-therapists doing internship or the master?s program were included using convenience sampling. They were asked to fill a self-developed questionnaire regarding use of electro-physical agents. Results: Out of 100 subjects, EPAs available to all were TENS, IFT, SWD, US, IR at their work- place, while LASER-94%, Cryotherapy-94%, EMG/NCV-93%, Contrast Bath-87%, UVR-86%, MWD-82%, Combination Therapy-81%, Shock-wave Therapy-78%, , Magneto-Therapy-76% and were available. Hydro therapy pool was unavailable to 65%. Frequently used EPAs were IFT-94%, US-92%, TENS-90%, ES-80%, Contrast Bath-67%, SWD-63%, ,Cryotherapy-56%, IR-52% a day. Factors which influence the use of EPAs the most were- background experiences, busy and tight schedule and availability of equipment. Another factor was technophobia, where half of people didn?t have any fear of technology. And it was found that 52% were self- confident while operating any modality. But only 6% felt that patient preference is a very strong factor. Conclusion: The survey shows a high availability and use of EPAs. Background and experience, busy and tight schedule, availability of equipment, degree of self- confidence operating the device, time and ease of application were the strong factors influencing their use.


  1. Robinson AJ. Clinical electrophysiology: electrotherapy and electrophysiologictesting.Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. 2008
  2. Robertson VJ, Ward A, Low J, Reed A. Electrotherapy Explained: Principles and Practice. Elsevier Health Sciences; 2006.
  3. Watson T. The role of electrotherapy in contemporary physiotherapy practice.?Man Ther.?2000;5:132?141.
  4. Houghton PE, Nussbaum EL, Hoens AM. Electrophysical agents - contraindications and Precautions: an evidence-based approach to clinical decision making in physical therapy.?Physiother Canada.?2010;62:1?80.
  5. Robinson AJ, Snyder-Mackler L. Clinical application of electrotherapeutic modalities.?1988;68:1235?1238.
  6. Edwards I, Jones M, Carr J, Braunack-Mayer A, Jensen GM. Clinical reasoning strategies in physical therapy.?2004;84:312?330.
  7. Dijkers MP, Murphy SL, Krellman J. Evidence-based practice for rehabilitation professionals: concepts and controversies.?Arch Phys Med Rehabil.?2012;93:S164?176.
  8. Lindsay D, Dearness J, Richardson C, Chapman A, Cuskelly G. A survey of electromodality usage in private physiotherapy practices.?Aust J Physiother.?1990;36:249?256.
  9. Magistro CM. Clinical decision making in physical therapy: A practitioner?s perspective.?1989;69:525?534.
  10. Green M. Evaluating evidence-based practice performance. Evid Based Med 2006;11:99-101.
  11. Johnson CJ. Getting started in evidence-based practice for child-hood speech-language disorders. Am J Speech Lang Pathol 2006;15:20-35.
  12. Lin SH, Murphy SL, Robinson JC. Facilitating evidence-based practice: process, strategies, and resources. Am J Occup Ther 2010;64:164-71.
  13. Holdar U1,?Wallin L,?Heiwe S., Why do we do as we do? Factors influencing clinical reasoning and decision-making among physiotherapists in an acute setting. Physiother Res Int.2013 Dec;18(4):220-9. Epub 2013 May 2.
  14. Watson T. The role of electrotherapy in contemporary physiotherapy practice.?Man Ther.?2000;5:132?141.
  15. Chipchase LS, Williams MT, Robertson VJ. A national study of the availability and use of electrophysical agents by Australian physiotherapists.?Physiother Theory Pract.?2009;25:279?296.
  16. Shah SGS, Farrow A. Trends in the availability and usage of electrophysical agents in physiotherapy practices from 1990 to 2010: a review.?PhysTher Rev.?2012;17:207?226.
  17. Pope GD, Mockett SP, Wright JP. A survey of electrotherapeutic modalities: Ownership and use in the NHS in England.?1995;81:82?91.
  18. Shah SG, Farrow A, Esnouf A. Availability and use of electrotherapy devices: A survey.?Int J TherRehabil.?2007;14:260?264.
  19. Chipchase LS, Williams MT, Robertson VJ. Preparedness of new graduate Australian physiotherapists in the use of electrophysical agents.?2008;94(Issue 4):274?280.
  20. Laufer, G. Der; Effectiveness of thermal and athermal short-wave diathermy for the management of knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis, Osteoarthritis and Cartilage 20 (2012) 957-966.
  21. Dierckx K, Deveugele M, Roosen P, Devisch I. Implementation of shared decision making in physical therapy: observed level of involvement and patient preference. PhysTher. 2013;93:1321?30.
  22. Fenety A, Harman K, Hoens A, Bassett R. Informed consent practices of physiotherapists in the treatment of low back pain. Man Ther. 2009;14:654?60.
  23. Springer S, Laufer Y, Elboim-Gabyzon M. Clinical decision making for using electro-physical agents by physiotherapists, an Israeli survey.?Isr J Health Policy Res. 2015;4:14.
 

[Dravya M. Mistry and Megha Sandeep Sheth. (2019); CLINICAL DECISION MAKING FOR USE OF ELECTRO-PHYSICAL AGENTS BY PHYSICAL-THERAPY INTERNS AND POST- GRADUATE STUDENTS OF AHMEDABAD, INDIA: A CROSS-SECTIONAL SURVEY. Int. J. of Adv. Res. 7 (Jun). 601-606] (ISSN 2320-5407). www.journalijar.com


Dr. Dravya M. Mistry


DOI:


Article DOI: 10.21474/IJAR01/9260      
DOI URL: https://dx.doi.org/10.21474/IJAR01/9260