Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Physiotherapists and Use of Low Back Pain Guidelines: A Qualitative Study of the Barriers and Facilitators

  • Published:
Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction A new set of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the management of low back pain (LBP) and prevention of persistent disability entitled “Clinic on Low back pain in Interdisciplinary Practice” (CLIP) was developed in the province of Quebec, Canada. The literature shows that simply disseminating CPGs does not necessarily lead to their adoption by clinicians. To improve adherence to CPGs among healthcare professionals, the literature suggests that there is a need to identify and address the factors impeding or facilitating their use. The aim of this study was therefore to identify the barriers to and facilitators of CLIP CPG use, as perceived by physiotherapists (PTs). Methods A descriptive study using a qualitative method was conducted with a sample of 16 PTs from a variety of professional backgrounds. Each participant used the CPGs over a 6-week period with two patients suffering from LBP, and then participated in a semi-structured interview in which he or she was asked to identify the barriers and facilitators experienced. Results The participating PTs identified many barriers and facilitators pertaining to the guidelines themselves, the users and the environment. Four key nodes emerged from these barriers and facilitators during data analysis. It appears that the clinicians’ understanding of the CPGs, the level of compatibility between their practices and the CLIP CPG recommendations, the level of CPG relevance as perceived by the clinicians, and their level of agreement with the CPGs, all affected their use of the guidelines. Conclusions In order to increase CLIP CPG use, the implementation strategy to be developed should take into account the barriers and facilitators that were identified in this study.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Rubin DI. Epidemiology and risk factors for spine pain. Neurol Clin. 2007;25(2):353–71. doi:10.1016/j.ncl.2007.01.004. Review.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Dagenais S, Caro J, Haldeman S. A systematic review of low back pain cost of illness studies in the United States and internationally. Spine J. 2008;8(1):8–20. doi:10.1016/j.spinee.2007.10.005.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Sackett DL, Straus S, Richardson WS, Rosenberg W, Haynes RB. Evidence-based medicine. How to practice and teach EBM. 2nd ed. New York: Churchill Livingstone; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Davis DA, Goldman J, Palda VA. Handbook on clinical practice guidelines. Ottawa: Canadian Medical Association; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Koes BW, van Tulder MW, Ostelo R, Burton AK, Waddell G. Clinical guidelines for the management of low back pain in primary care. An international comparison. Spine. 2001;26:2504–14. doi:10.1097/00007632-200111150-00022.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Burton AK, Waddell G. Clinical guidelines in the management of low back pain. Bailliere’s Clin Rheumatol. 1998;12(1):17–35. doi:10.1016/S0950-3579(98)80004-6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. van Tulder MW, Tuut M, Pennick V, Bombardier C, Assendelft WJ. Quality of primary care guidelines for acute low back pain. Spine. 2004;29(17):E357–62. doi:10.1097/01.brs.0000137056.64166.51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Staal JB, Hlobil H, van Tulder MW, Waddell G, Burton AK, Koes BW, et al. Occupational health guidelines for the management of low back pain: an international comparison. Occup Environ Med. 2003;60(9):618–26.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Arnau JM, Vallano A, Lopez A, Pellise F, Delgado MJ, Prat N. A critical review of guidelines for low back pain treatment. Eur Spine J. 2006;15(5):543–53. doi:10.1007/s00586-005-1027-y.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Freemantle N. Implementation strategies. Fam Pract. 2000;17(Suppl 1):S7–10. doi:10.1093/fampra/17.suppl_1.S7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. van Tulder MW, Croft PR, van Splunteren P, Miedema HS, Underwood MR, Hendriks HJ, et al. Disseminating and implementing the results of back pain research in primary care. Spine. 2002;27(5):E121–7. doi:10.1097/00007632-200203010-00018.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Grimshaw JM, Shirran L, Thomas R, Mowatt G, Fraser C, Bero L, et al. Changing provider behavior: an overview of systematic reviews of interventions. Med Care. 2001;39(8, Suppl 2):II2–45. doi:10.1097/00005650-200108002-00002.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Oxman AD, Flottorp S. An overview of strategies to promote implementation of evidence based health care. Evidence based practice in primary care. London: BMJ Books; 1998. p. 91–109.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Oxman AD, Thomson MA, Davis DA, Haynes RB. No magic bullets: a systematic review of 102 trials of interventions to improve professional practice. Can Med Assoc J. 1995;153(10):1423–31.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Lomas J. Words without action? The production, dissemination, and impact of consensus recommendations. Annu Rev Public Health. 1991;12:41–65. doi:10.1146/annurev.pu.12.050191.000353.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Gross PA. Implementing evidence-based recommendations for health care: a roundtable comparing European and American experiences. Jt Comm J Qual Improv. 2000;26(9):547–53.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Grimshaw JM, Thomas RE, MacLennan G, Fraser C, Ramsay CR, Vale L, et al. Effectiveness and efficiency of guideline dissemination and implementation strategies. Health Technol Assess. 2004;8(6):iii–iv. Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov’t, Review.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Gross PA, Greenfield S, Cretin S, Ferguson J, Grimshaw J, Grol R, et al. Optimal methods for guideline implementation: conclusions from Leeds Castle meeting. Med Care. 2001;39(8, Suppl 2):II85–92.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Davis DA, Thomson MA, Oxman AD, Haynes RB. Changing physician performance. A systematic review of the effect of continuing medical education strategies. J Am Med Assoc. 1995;274(9):700–5. doi:10.1001/jama.274.9.700.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Thomson O’Brien M, Oxman A, Davis D, Haynes R, Freemantle N, Harvey E. Audit and feedback versus alternative strategies: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev (Online: Update Software). 2000; (2):CD000260. Review.

  21. Grol R. Successes and failures in the implementation of evidence-based guidelines for clinical practice. Med Care. 2001;39(8, Suppl 2):II46–54. doi:10.1097/00005650-200108002-00003.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Grol R. Beliefs and evidence in changing clinical practice. BMJ (Clin Res Ed). 1997;315:418–21.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Grol R. Personal paper. Beliefs and evidence in changing clinical practice. BMJ (Clin Res Ed). 1997;315(7105):418–21.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Mittman BS, Tonesk X, Jacobson PD. Implementing clinical practice guidelines: social influence strategies and practitioner behavior change. Qual Rev Bull. 1992;18(12):413–22.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Moulding NT, Silagy CA, Weller DP. A framework for effective management of change in clinical practice: dissemination and implementation of clinical practice guidelines. Qual Health Care. 1999;8(3):177–83.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Solberg LI, Brekke ML, Fowles J, Jacobsen DN, Kottke TE, Mosser G, et al. Lessons from experienced guideline implementers: attend to many factors and use multiple strategies. Jt Comm J Qual Improv. 2000;26(4):171–88.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Shaw B, Cheater F, Baker R, Gillies C, Hearnshaw H, Flottorp S, et al. Tailored interventions to overcome identified barriers to change: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005;20(3):CD005470. Meta-Analysis, Review.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Grilli R, Lomas J. Evaluating the message: the relationship between the compliance rate and the subject of a practice guideline. Med Care. 1994;32:202–13. doi:10.1097/00005650-199403000-00002.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Graham ID, Logan J, Harrison MB, Straus SE, Tetroe J, Caswell W, et al. Lost in knowledge translation: time for a map? J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2006;26(1):13–24. doi:10.1002/chp.47.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Lomas J. Diffusion, dissemination, and implementation: who should do what? Ann NY Acad Sci. 1993;703:226–35. doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.1993.tb26351.x. Review.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Chenot J, Becker A, Leonhardt C, Keller S, Donner-Banzhoff N, Baum E, et al. The impact of specialist care for low back pain on health service utilization in primary care patients: a prospective cohort study. Eur J Pain (London, England). 2008;12(3):275–83. doi:10.1016/j.ejpain.2007.06.004. Epub 2007 Jul 27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Stevenson K, Lewis M, Hay E. Do physiotherapists’ attitudes towards evidence-based practice change as a result of an evidence-based educational programme? J Eval Clin Prac. 2004;10(2):207–17. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2753.2003.00479.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Jette DU, Bacon K, Batty C, Carlson M, Ferland A, Hemingway RD, et al. Evidence-based practice: beliefs, attitudes, knowledge, and behaviors of physical therapists. Phys Ther. 2003;83(9):786–805.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Iles R, Davidson M. Evidence based practice: a survey of physiotherapists’ current practice. Physiother Res Int. 2006;11(2):93–103. doi:10.1002/pri.328.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Swinkels IC, van den Ende CH, van den Bosch W, Dekker J, Wimmers RH. Physiotherapy management of low back pain: does practice match the Dutch guidelines? Aust J Physiother. 2005;51(1):35–41.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Poitras S, Rossignol M, Dionne C, Tousignant M, Truchon M, Arsenault B, et al. An interdisciplinary clinical practice model for the management of low-back pain in primary care: the CLIP project. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2008;9:54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Rossignol M, Poitras S, Dionne C, Tousignant M, Truchon M, Arsenault B, et al. An interdisciplinary guideline development process: the Clinic on Low-back pain in Interdisciplinary Practice (CLIP) low-back pain guidelines. Implement Sci. 2007;2:36. doi:10.1186/1748-5908-2-36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Fortin M-F. Le processus de la recherche de la conception à la réalisation. Montréal: Décarie Éditeur; 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Crabtree BF, Miller WL. Doing qualitative research. Thousand Oak: Sage Publications; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Deslauriers J-P, Kérisit M. Le devis de recherche qualitative. In: Poupart J, Deslauriers J-P, Groulx L-H, Laperrière A, Mayer R, Pires A, editors. La recherche qualitative Enjeux épistémologiques et méthodologiques. Boucherville: Gaetan Morin Éditeur; 1997. p. 85–111.

  41. Miles MB, Huberman AM. Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook. 2nd ed. Thousand Oak: Sage Publications; 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Harrison S, Dowswell G, Wright J, Russell I. General practitioners’ uptake of clinical practice guidelines: a qualitative study. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2003;8(3):149–53. doi:10.1258/135581903322029494.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Schers H, Wensing M, Huijsmans Z, van Tulder M, Grol R. Implementation barriers for general practice guidelines on low back pain a qualitative study. Spine. 2001;26(15):E348–53. doi:10.1097/00007632-200108010-00013.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Shiffman R, Dixon J, Brandt C, Essaihi A, Hsiao A, Michel G, et al. The GuideLine Implementability Appraisal (GLIA): development of an instrument to identify obstacles to guideline implementation. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2005;5(1):23. doi:10.1186/1472-6947-5-23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Pathman DE, Konrad TR, Freed GL, Freeman VA, Koch GG. The awareness-to-adherence model of the steps to clinical guideline compliance. The case of pediatric vaccine recommendations. Med Care. 1996;34(9):873–89. doi:10.1097/00005650-199609000-00002.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Maue SK, Segal R, Kimberlin CL, Lipowski EE. Predicting physician guideline compliance: an assessment of motivators and perceived barriers. Am J Manag Care. 2004;10(6):383–91.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Ajzen I. Attitudes, personality, and behavior. Chicago: Dorsey Press; 1988.

  48. Saillour-Glenisson F, Michel P. Individual and collective facilitators of and barriers to the use of clinical practice guidelines by physicians: a literature review. Revue d’Epidemiologie et de Sante Publique. 2003;51(1 Pt 1):65–80.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Turner P, Whitfield TW. Physiotherapists’ use of evidence based practice: a cross-national study. Physiother Res Int. 1997;2(1):17–29. doi:10.1002/pri.76.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Stewart RE, Vroegop S, Kamps GB, van der Werf GT, Meyboom-de Jong B. Factors influencing adherence to guidelines in general practice. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2003;19(3):546–54. doi:10.1017/S0266462303000497.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Poitras S. Pratiques cliniques des physiothérapeutes dans le traitement des travailleurs souffrant de maux de dos aigus ou subaigus. Montréal: Université de Montréal; 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Gauthier B. Recherche Sociale de la problématique à la collecte des données. 4th ed. Sainte-Foy: Presses de l’Université du Québec; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Van der Maren J-M. Méthodes de recherche pour l’éducation. Montréal: De Boeck; 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Krippendorff K. Content analysis: an introduction to its methodology. Thousand Oak: Sage Publications; 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Carey JW, Morgan M, Oxtoby MJ. Intercoder agreement in analysis of responses to open-ended interview questions: example from tuberculosis research. Cult Anthropol Methods. 1996;8(3):1–5.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Landry R. L’analyse de contenu. In: Gauthier B, editor. Recherche sociale de la problématique à la collecte des données. Québec: Presses de l’université du Québec; 1997. p. 329–56.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Loisel P, Buchbinder R, Hazard R, Keller R, Scheel I, Tulder M, et al. Prevention of work disability due to musculoskeletal disorders: the challenge of implementing evidence. J Occup Rehabil. 2005;15(4):507. doi:10.1007/s10926-005-8031-2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Guzman J, Jones D, Cassidy JD, Furlan AD, Loisel P, Frank JW. Key factors in back disability prevention: what influences the choice of priorities? Spine. 2007;32(9):E281–9. Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov’t.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Atlas SJ, Chang Y, Kammann E, Keller RB, Deyo RA, Singer DE. Long-term disability and return to work among patients who have a herniated lumbar disc: the effect of disability compensation. J Bone Jt Surg. 2000;82(1):4–15. Comparative Study, Research Support, U.S. Gov’t, P.H.S.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. Atlas SJ, Chang Y, Keller RB, Singer DE, Wu YA, Deyo RA. The impact of disability compensation on long-term treatment outcomes of patients with sciatica due to a lumbar disc herniation. Spine. 2006;31:3061–9. doi:10.1097/01.brs.0000250325.87083.8d.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Dahan R, Borkan J, Brown J-B, Reis S, Hermoni D, Harris S. The challenge of using the low back pain guidelines: a qualitative research. J Eval Clin Prac. 2007;13(4):616–20. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2753.2007.00855.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Espeland A, Baerheim A. Factors affecting general practitioners’ decisions about plain radiography for back pain: implications for classification of guideline barriers—a qualitative study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2003;3(1):8. doi:10.1186/1472-6963-3-8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Cabana MD, Rand CS, Powe NR, Wu AW, Wilson MH, Abboud PA, et al. Why don’t physicians follow clinical practice guidelines? A framework for improvement. J Am Med Assoc. 1999;282(15):1458–65. doi:10.1001/jama.282.15.1458.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Christiaens T, De Backer D, Burgers J, Baerheim A. Guidelines, evidence, and cultural factors. Scand J Prim Health Care. 2004;22(3):141–5. doi:10.1080/02813430410006521.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Fishbein M. The role of theory in HIV prevention. AIDS Care. 2000;12(3):273–8. doi:10.1080/09540120050042918.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  66. Rhodes F, Stein JA, Fishbein M, Goldstein RB, Rotheram-Borus MJ. Using theory to understand how interventions work: Project RESPECT, condom use, and the Integrative Model. AIDS Behav. 2007;11(3):393–407. doi:10.1007/s10461-007-9208-9. Epub 2007 Feb 24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Armstrong MP, McDonough S, Baxter GD. Clinical guidelines versus clinical practice in the management of low back pain. Int J Clin Pract. 2003;57(1):9–13.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  68. Foster NE, Thompson KA, Baxter GD, Allen JM. Management of nonspecific low back pain by physiotherapists in Britain and Ireland. A descriptive questionnaire of current clinical practice. Spine. 1999;24(13):1332–42. doi:10.1097/00007632-199907010-00011.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  69. Poitras S, Blais R, Swaine B, Rossignol M. Management of work-related low back pain: a population-based survey of physical therapists. Phys Ther. 2005;85(11):1168–81.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Jette AM, Smith K, Haley SM, Davis KD. Physical therapy episodes of care for patients with low back pain. Phys Ther. 1994;74(2):101–10. discussion 10-5.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  71. Turner PA, Harby-Owren H, Shackleford F, So A, Fosse T, Whitfield TW. Audits of physiotherapy practice. Physiother Theory Prac. 1999;15:261–74. doi:10.1080/095939899307667.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Bekkering GE, Engers AJ, Wensing M, Hendriks HJ, van Tulder MW, Oostendorp RA, et al. Development of an implementation strategy for physiotherapy guidelines on low back pain. Aust J Physiother. 2003;49(3):208–14.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Waddell G, Burton AK, Main CJ. Screening to identify people at risk of long term incapacity for work: a conceptual and scientific review. London: Royal Society of Medicine Press; 2003. ISBN 9781853155642.

  74. Truchon M. Determinants of chronic disability related to low back pain: towards an integrative biopsychosocial model. Disabil Rehabil. 2001;23(17):758–67. doi:10.1080/09638280110061744.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  75. Truchon M, Fillion L, Truchon G, Dionne C, Arsenault B, Viau C. Les déterminants de l’incapacité liés à la lombalgie. Études et recherches/Rapport R-487. Montréal: IRSST; 2007. p. 108.

    Google Scholar 

  76. Frank J, Brooker A, DeMaio S, Kerr M, Maetzel A, Shannon H, et al. Disability resulting from occupational low back pain. Part II: What do we know about secondary prevention? A review of the scientific evidence on prevention after disability begins. Spine. 1996;21(24):2918–29. doi:10.1097/00007632-199612150-00025. Review.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  77. Schers H, Braspenning J, Drijver R, Wensing M, Grol R. Low back pain in general practice: reported management and reasons for not adhering to the guidelines in the Netherlands. Brit J Gen Prac. 2000;50:640–4.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  78. Grol R, Grimshaw J. From best evidence to best practice: effective implementation of change in patients’ care. Lancet. 2003;362(9391):1225–30. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(03)14546-1.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Harrington JT, Dopf CA, Chalgren CS. Implementing guidelines for interdisciplinary care of low back pain: a critical role for pre-appointment management of specialty referrals. Jt Comm J Qual Improv. 2001;27(12):651–63.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by a grant from the Quebec Rehabilitation Research Network.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Rehabilitation, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Université de Sherbrooke, 3001, 12th Avenue North, Sherbrooke, QC, J1H 5N4, Canada

    Anne-Marie Côté, Marie-José Durand & Michel Tousignant

  2. Centre for Action in Work Disability Prevention and Rehabilitation, Longueuil, QC, Canada

    Marie-José Durand

  3. Research Center on Aging, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada

    Michel Tousignant

  4. School of Rehabilitation Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada

    Stéphane Poitras

Authors
  1. Anne-Marie Côté
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marie-José Durand
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Michel Tousignant
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Stéphane Poitras
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anne-Marie Côté.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Côté, AM., Durand, MJ., Tousignant, M. et al. Physiotherapists and Use of Low Back Pain Guidelines: A Qualitative Study of the Barriers and Facilitators. J Occup Rehabil 19, 94–105 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-009-9167-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-009-9167-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation