Table 1.
The pre–post QI programme difference in mean change of self-assessment of knowledge and attitudes in the use of outcome measures*
| # | Pre-QI Mean (SD) |
Post-QI Mean (SD) |
Change Mean (SD) |
t† | P value | |
| 1 | I know where to find outcome measures. | 3.75 (0.20) | 3.94 (0.06) | 0.19 | 1.38 | 0.19 |
| 2 | I am able to implement outcome measures together with my patients | 3.56 (0.26) | 3.88 (0.12) | 0.31 | 1.78 | 0.10 |
| 3 | I am able to interpret outcome measure results | 3.69 (0.23) | 3.38 (0.92) | −0.19 | −1.16 | 0.26 |
| 4 | Using outcome measures does not affect my professional authority to make my own decisions | 3.19 (1.23) | 3.38 (0.92) | 0.19 | 0.56 | 0.58 |
| 5 | Using outcome measures helps me to formulate a PT diagnosis | 2.56 (0.93) | 2.88 (1.18) | 0.31 | 1.78 | 0.10 |
| 6 | Outcome measures are useful in the evaluation of a treatment | 3.31 (0.50) | 3.38 (0.38) | 0.06 | 0.44 | 0.67 |
| 7 | I am able to use outcome measures within my clinical reasoning process | 3.44 (0.26) | 3.56 (0.26) | 0.13 | 0.70 | 0.50 |
| 8 | Outcome measures have a positive influence on the quality of PT practice | 3.31 (0.50) | 3.25 (0.47) | −0.06 | −0.32 | 0.75 |
| 9 | It is important to document the patient’ perceived health objectively with outcome measures | 3.38 (0.52) | 3.75 (0.20) | 0.38 | 2.09 | 0.05 |
| 10 | Using outcome measures in clinical practice takes too much time | 1.19 (0.70) | 1.56 (1.60) | 0.38 | 1.25 | 0.23 |
| 11 | I think my patients do think that using outcome measures takes too much time | 2.88 (0.52) | 2.63 (1.05) | −0.25 | −0.77 | 0.45 |
| 12 | When using PROMs I am able to include the wishes of my patients | 2.44 (0.53) | 2.5 (1.20) | 0.06 | 0.21 | 0.84 |
| 13 | I would like to use outcome measures more often | 1.85 (0.52) | 2.13 (1.58) | 0.25 | 0.72 | 0.48 |
| 14 | I use outcome measures in daily practice | 3.44 (0.66) | 3.25 (0.73) | −0.19 | −0.90 | 0.38 |
| 15 | I have experienced the added value of outcome measures | 3.13 (0.52) | 3.19 (0.70) | 0.06 | 0.32 | 0.75 |
| 16 | Patients are cooperative in using outcome measures | 2.0 (0.80) | 2.69 (0.50) | 0.69 | 3.15 | 0.007‡ |
| 17 | Using outcome measures is a standard part of my clinical reasoning | 2.94 (0.60) | 3.13 (0.52) | 0.19 | 0.90 | 0.38 |
| 18 | Outcome measures are available in our practice | 3.88 (0.12) | 3.94 (0.06) | 0.06 | −0.56 | 0.58 |
| 19 | Within our practice we have made arrangements on how to use outcome measures | 3.56 (0.40) | 3.75 (0.33) | 0.19 | −1.38 | 0.19 |
| 20 | My supervisor(s) support the use of outcome measures | 3.88 (0.12) | 3.94 (0.06) | 0.06 | −1.0) | 0.33 |
| 21 | My supervisor(s) use outcome measures in clinical practice themselves | 3.69 (0.36) | 3.94 (0.06) | 0.25 | −1.73 | 0.10 |
| 22 | My supervisor(s) require that outcome measures data are reported in our electronic health records | 3.88 (0.12) | 3.81 (0.16) | −0.06 | 1.0 | 0.33 |
| 23 | My colleagues also use outcome measures in clinical practice | 3.69 (0.36) | 3.69 (0.23) | 0.00 | 0 | 1.00 |
| 24 | In our practice we discuss how to implement outcome measures | 3.13 (0.65) | 3.63 (0.38) | 0.50 | −2.74) | 0.02‡ |
| 25 | The use of outcome measures fits our work routine | 3.25 (0.47) | 3.31 (0.50) | 0.06 | −0.25 | 0.81 |
| 26 | When possible we send patient reported outcome measures to our patients electronically. | 2.13 (1.45) | 1.69 (1.83) | −0.44 | 0.91) | 0.38 |
| 27 | Patient-reported outcome measures are administered by the patients themselves. | 2.06 (1.53) | 1.62 (2.12) | −0.44 | 0.92 | 0.37 |
*Using 5-point Likert scale ranging from 0: completely disagree to 4: completely agree.
†Paired t-test with df=15.
‡∗p<0.05.
PROMs, patient-reported outcome measures; PT, physical therapist; QI, quality improvement.