| Title |
Scope of practice review: providers for triage and assessment of spine-related disorders
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/jmdh.s97590 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Omenaa Boakye, Arden Birney, Esther Suter, Leah Adeline Phillips, Victoria YM Suen |
| Abstract |
This study explored which health care providers could be involved in centralized intake for patients with nonspecific low back pain to enhance access, continuity, and appropriateness of care. We reviewed the scope of practice regulations for a range of health care providers. We also conducted telephone interviews with 17 individuals representing ten provincial colleges and regulatory bodies to further understand providers' legislated scopes of practice. Activities relevant to triaging and assessing patients with low back pain were mapped against professionals' scope of practice. Family physicians and nurse practitioners have the most comprehensive scopes and can complete all restricted activities for spine assessment and triage, while the scope of registered nurses and licensed practical nurses are progressively narrower. Chiropractors, occupational therapists, physiotherapists, and athletic therapists are considered experts in musculoskeletal assessments and appear best suited for musculoskeletal specific assessment and triage. Other providers may play a complementary role depending on the individual patient needs. These findings indicate that an interprofessional assessment and triage team that includes allied health professionals would be a feasible option to create a centralized intake model. Implementation of such teams would require removing barriers that currently prevent providers from delivering on their full scope of practice. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 65 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 16 | 25% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 7 | 11% |
| Unknown | 27 | 42% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 14 | 22% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 17% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 6% |
| Unknown | 31 | 48% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 May 2016.
All research outputs
#20,656,161
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare
#765
of 1,001 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#232,134
of 311,866 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare
#12
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,001 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 311,866 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.