mdh.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Factors influencing physical therapists' clinical reasoning: qualitative systematic review and meta-synthesis
Mälardalen University, School of Health, Care and Social Welfare, Health and Welfare.ORCID iD: 0000-0001-5356-916X
Univ British Columbia, Canada.
2017 (English)In: Physical Therapy Reviews, ISSN 1083-3196, E-ISSN 1743-288X, Vol. 22, no 1-2, 60-75 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Background: The capacity of physical therapists to reason effectively in patient management is essential to maximizing outcomes. Although conceptual frameworks of clinical reasoning exist, their theoretical foundations are insufficiently validated to establish those factors that are paramount in guiding physical therapists' clinical reasoning. Studies on how physical therapists clinically reason constitute important means of identifying constructs of such reasoning. Objective: This systematic review aimed to synthesize and interpret the findings of qualitative studies designed to examine factors that are inherent in physical therapists' clinical reasoning with respect to their knowledge, experiences, and practices. Methods: Searches of studies were carried out in four databases, gray literature, and reference lists. Two reviewers independently assessed methodological quality of the studies using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP) and performed the analysis: extraction and comparative appraisal of findings, identification of themes, reciprocal translation synthesis, and identification of categories and subcategories. Results: Ten studies were included. Four themes of factors influencing physical therapists' clinical reasoning emerged, namely, Physical therapist as a source, Patient as a source, Elements of the reasoning process, and Context. Conclusions: The identified themes validated some constructs underlying existing clinical reasoning frameworks. Most influencing factors were related to the physical therapist, which highlights opportunities to improve effective reasoning at this level. The notion that this process is recurrent, multifaceted, and contextual lends itself to changing in accordance with the needs of the patient, consistent with a biopsychosocial perspective. How clinicians weigh biomedical and psychosocial elements in their reasoning however warrants further study.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2017. Vol. 22, no 1-2, 60-75 p.
National Category
Physiotherapy
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:mdh:diva-36159DOI: 10.1080/10833196.2017.1289647ISI: 000404937300008OAI: oai:DiVA.org:mdh-36159DiVA: diva2:1128725
Available from: 2017-07-27 Created: 2017-07-27 Last updated: 2017-07-27Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Elvén, Maria
By organisation
Health and Welfare
In the same journal
Physical Therapy Reviews
Physiotherapy

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

Altmetric score

Total: 12 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf