Abstract

BackgroundPTNow.org is an evidence-based, on-line portal created by a professional membership association to promote use of evidence in practice and to help decrease unwarranted variation in practice. The site contains synthesis documents designed to promote efficient clinical reasoning. These documents were written and peer-reviewed by teams of content experts and master clinicians. The purpose of this paper is to report on the content and construct validity as well as usability of the site.MethodsPhysical therapist participants used clinical summaries (available in 3 formats--as a full summary with hyperlinks, “quick takes” with hyperlinks, and a portable two-page version) on the PTNow.org site to answer knowledge acquisition and clinical reasoning questions related to four patient scenarios. They also responded to questions about ease of use related to website navigation and about format and completeness of information using a 1–5 Likert scale. Responses were coded to reflect how participants used the site and then were summarized descriptively. Preferences for clinical summary format were analyzed using an analysis of variance (ANOVA) and a Dunnett T3 post hoc analysis.ResultsSeventeen participants completed the study. Clinical relevance and completeness ratings by experienced clinicians, which were used as the measure of content validity, ranged from 3.1 to 4.6 on a 5 point scale. Construct validity based on the information on the PTNow.org site was supported for knowledge acquisition questions 66 % of the time and for clinical reasoning questions 40 % of the time. Usability ratings for the full clinical summary were 4.6 (1.2); for the quick takes, 3.5 (.98); and for the portable clinical summary, 4.0 (.45). Participants preferred the full clinical summary over the other two formats (F = 5.908, P = 0.007). One hundred percent of the participants stated that they would recommend the PTNow site to their colleagues.ConclusionPrelimary evidence supported both content validity and construct validity of knowledge acquisition, and partially supported construct validity of clinical reasoning for the clinical summaries on the PTNow.org site. Usability was supported, with users preferring the full clinical summary over the other two formats. Iterative design is ongoing.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12911-015-0178-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Highlights

  • PTNow.org is an evidence-based, on-line portal created by a professional membership association to promote use of evidence in practice and to help decrease unwarranted variation in practice

  • In a survey of a random sample of 488 American Physical Therapy Association (APTA) members, Jette et al [3] found that most agreed that Evidence-based practice (EBP) was necessary, that literature was helpful in their practices, and that the quality of patient care was better when evidence was used

  • Six surveys were completed for the total knee arthroplasty (TKA) scenario; 5 for benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV); 2 for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD); 2 for Parkinson disease (PD); and 2 for the comparison of PD and COPD

Read more

Summary

Introduction

PTNow.org is an evidence-based, on-line portal created by a professional membership association to promote use of evidence in practice and to help decrease unwarranted variation in practice. The site contains synthesis documents designed to promote efficient clinical reasoning. These documents were written and peer-reviewed by teams of content experts and master clinicians. Physical therapists and other health care professionals frequently report lack of time as the largest barrier to using evidence in practice [3,4,5]. In a survey of a random sample of 488 APTA members, Jette et al [3] found that most agreed that EBP was necessary, that literature was helpful in their practices, and that the quality of patient care was better when evidence was used. 84 % indicated they needed to increase the use of evidence in their daily practice [3]

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.