The perceptions of physical therapists about facilitators and challenges in the use of different tools for resistance training in COPD patients: a mixed-method study

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Freire, Ana Paula Coelho Figueira
Data de Publicação: 2019
Outros Autores: Uzeloto, Juliana Souza, Silva, Bruna Spolador De Alencar, Franco, Marcia Rodrigues Costa, Ramos, Dionei, Ramos, Ercy Mara Cipulo
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional da UNESP
Texto Completo: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1809-2950/18013926032019
http://hdl.handle.net/11449/183797
Resumo: ABSTRACT This study sought to quantify and qualitatively analyze the perception of physical therapists about facilitators and the challenges in the use of different types of tools for resistance training in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. This was a mixed-model study with qualitative analysis developed in a rehabilitation center. Six physical therapists who performed a randomized clinical trial were interviewed. The protocol consisted of the evaluation of three types of resistance training: elastic tubes, elastic bands, and training with conventional weight machines. After completion of the randomized trial, therapists were invited to participate in a focus group to collect qualitative data. Physical therapists also answered a quantitative questionnaire containing closed questions. The main outcome measures were the opinion of physical therapists about the advantages and disadvantages in clinical practice of each of the analyzed tools. The focus group analysis resulted in eight themes: Insecurities regarding load and handling tools, implementation of home-based treatment, improvements of tools, advantages and disadvantages of tools, incidence of injuries with elastic tools, patient’s preferences, and particularities of the tools. Physical therapists pointed out different challenges and facilitators for resistance training. Characteristics of the tools such as costs, portability, handling and practicality were cited as factors that influence clinical practice. In the quantitative analysis, no differences were observed when comparing the scores of each instrument. The three tools analyzed are applicable and feasible in the clinical practice of physical therapists; moreover, they present different characteristics and particularities that should be considered, such as cost, clinical applicability, portability and perception of the patient and therapists.
id UNSP_215d8d212dcd1c2b1d0cafe2f8a18f21
oai_identifier_str oai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/183797
network_acronym_str UNSP
network_name_str Repositório Institucional da UNESP
repository_id_str 2946
spelling The perceptions of physical therapists about facilitators and challenges in the use of different tools for resistance training in COPD patients: a mixed-method studyPercepción de fisioterapeutas sobre facilitadores y barreras en el uso de diferentes herramientas de entrenamiento de resistencia en pacientes con EPOC: estudio de método mixtoPercepção de fisioterapeutas sobre facilitadores e barreiras no uso de diferentes ferramentas para treinamento resistido em pacientes com DPOC: estudo de método mistosPulmonary DiseaseExercise TrainingPulmonary RehabilitationPhysical TherapyQualitative MethodsDoença PulmonarTreinamento FísicoReabilitação PulmonarFisioterapiaMétodo QualitativoABSTRACT This study sought to quantify and qualitatively analyze the perception of physical therapists about facilitators and the challenges in the use of different types of tools for resistance training in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. This was a mixed-model study with qualitative analysis developed in a rehabilitation center. Six physical therapists who performed a randomized clinical trial were interviewed. The protocol consisted of the evaluation of three types of resistance training: elastic tubes, elastic bands, and training with conventional weight machines. After completion of the randomized trial, therapists were invited to participate in a focus group to collect qualitative data. Physical therapists also answered a quantitative questionnaire containing closed questions. The main outcome measures were the opinion of physical therapists about the advantages and disadvantages in clinical practice of each of the analyzed tools. The focus group analysis resulted in eight themes: Insecurities regarding load and handling tools, implementation of home-based treatment, improvements of tools, advantages and disadvantages of tools, incidence of injuries with elastic tools, patient’s preferences, and particularities of the tools. Physical therapists pointed out different challenges and facilitators for resistance training. Characteristics of the tools such as costs, portability, handling and practicality were cited as factors that influence clinical practice. In the quantitative analysis, no differences were observed when comparing the scores of each instrument. The three tools analyzed are applicable and feasible in the clinical practice of physical therapists; moreover, they present different characteristics and particularities that should be considered, such as cost, clinical applicability, portability and perception of the patient and therapists.RESUMEN El objetivo del estudio fue cuantificar y analizar cualitativamente la percepción de fisioterapeutas sobre facilitadores y barreras en el uso de diferentes herramientas de entrenamiento de resistencia en pacientes con enfermedad pulmonar obstructiva crónica (EPOC). El método utilizado fue desarrollado en un centro de rehabilitación. Seis profesionales que participaron como terapeutas en un ensayo clínico aleatorizado fueron entrevistados. El protocolo consistió en la evaluación de tres herramientas de entrenamiento de resistencia: tubos elásticos, bandas elásticas y entrenamiento convencional con equipo de entrenamiento con pesas. Después del ensayo clínico aleatorizado, se invitó a los fisioterapeutas a participar en un grupo focal para análisis cualitativo y a responder un cuestionario cerrado para análisis cuantitativo. Los profesionales opinaron sobre las ventajas y desventajas de cada una de las tres herramientas en la práctica clínica. El análisis del grupo resultó en ocho temas: falta de fiabilidad en lo referente a la carga y al manejo de las herramientas; puesta en práctica del tratamiento domiciliario; mejoras en las herramientas; ventajas y desventajas de las herramientas; incidencia de lesiones con las herramientas elásticas; preferencia de los pacientes; particularidades de cada herramienta. Los fisioterapeutas señalaron diferentes barreras y facilitadores para el entrenamiento de resistencia. Características de la herramienta - como costo, portabilidad, manejo, practicidad y percepción del paciente y del fisioterapeuta - fueron mencionadas como factores que influyen en la práctica clínica. En el análisis cuantitativo no se observaron diferencias de puntaje entre los instrumentos. Las tres herramientas son aplicables en la práctica clínica del fisioterapeuta. Además, se deben considerar las características y particularidades de cada una de ellas.RESUMO O objetivo do estudo foi quantificar e analisar qualitativamente a percepção de fisioterapeutas sobre facilitadores e barreiras no uso de diferentes ferramentas para treinamento resistido em pacientes com doença pulmonar obstrutiva crônica (DPOC). O método utilizado foi desenvolvido em um centro de reabilitação. Seis fisioterapeutas que participaram como terapeutas de um ensaio clínico randomizado foram entrevistados. O protocolo consistiu na avaliação de três ferramentas para treinamento resistido: tubos elásticos, bandas elásticas e treinamento convencional com equipamentos de musculação. Depois da finalização do ensaio clínico randomizado, os fisioterapeutas foram convidados a participar de um grupo focal para análise qualitativa e responder questionário fechado para análise quantitativa. Os profissionais opinaram sobre vantagens e desvantagens de cada uma das três ferramentas na prática clínica. A análise do grupo focal resultou em oito temas: insegurança em relação à carga e manuseio das ferramentas; implementação de tratamento domiciliar; melhorias para ferramentas; vantagens e desvantagens das ferramentas; incidência de lesões com ferramentas elásticas; preferência dos pacientes; e particularidades de cada ferramenta. Fisioterapeutas apontaram diferentes barreiras e facilitadores para o treinamento resistido. Características das ferramentas - como custo, portabilidade, manuseio, praticidade e percepção do paciente e fisioterapeuta - foram citadas como fatores que influenciam a prática clínica. Na análise quantitativa, nenhuma diferença foi observada quando comparados os escores para cada instrumento. As três ferramentas são aplicáveis na prática clínica do fisioterapeuta. Adicionalmente, as características e particularidades de cada uma delas devem ser consideradas.Universidade Estadual PaulistaUniversidade Estadual PaulistaUniversidade de São PauloUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)Freire, Ana Paula Coelho FigueiraUzeloto, Juliana SouzaSilva, Bruna Spolador De AlencarFranco, Marcia Rodrigues CostaRamos, DioneiRamos, Ercy Mara Cipulo2019-10-03T17:31:41Z2019-10-03T17:31:41Z2019-09-01info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/article275-284application/pdfhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1809-2950/18013926032019Fisioterapia e Pesquisa. Universidade de São Paulo, v. 26, n. 3, p. 275-284, 2019.1809-2950http://hdl.handle.net/11449/18379710.1590/1809-2950/18013926032019S1809-29502019000300275S1809-29502019000300275.pdf98010612581495630000-0002-3310-7336SciELOreponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESPinstname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)instacron:UNESPengFisioterapia e Pesquisainfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2023-12-24T06:17:34Zoai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/183797Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://repositorio.unesp.br/oai/requestopendoar:29462024-08-05T21:10:31.841542Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv The perceptions of physical therapists about facilitators and challenges in the use of different tools for resistance training in COPD patients: a mixed-method study
Percepción de fisioterapeutas sobre facilitadores y barreras en el uso de diferentes herramientas de entrenamiento de resistencia en pacientes con EPOC: estudio de método mixto
Percepção de fisioterapeutas sobre facilitadores e barreiras no uso de diferentes ferramentas para treinamento resistido em pacientes com DPOC: estudo de método mistos
title The perceptions of physical therapists about facilitators and challenges in the use of different tools for resistance training in COPD patients: a mixed-method study
spellingShingle The perceptions of physical therapists about facilitators and challenges in the use of different tools for resistance training in COPD patients: a mixed-method study
Freire, Ana Paula Coelho Figueira
Pulmonary Disease
Exercise Training
Pulmonary Rehabilitation
Physical Therapy
Qualitative Methods
Doença Pulmonar
Treinamento Físico
Reabilitação Pulmonar
Fisioterapia
Método Qualitativo
title_short The perceptions of physical therapists about facilitators and challenges in the use of different tools for resistance training in COPD patients: a mixed-method study
title_full The perceptions of physical therapists about facilitators and challenges in the use of different tools for resistance training in COPD patients: a mixed-method study
title_fullStr The perceptions of physical therapists about facilitators and challenges in the use of different tools for resistance training in COPD patients: a mixed-method study
title_full_unstemmed The perceptions of physical therapists about facilitators and challenges in the use of different tools for resistance training in COPD patients: a mixed-method study
title_sort The perceptions of physical therapists about facilitators and challenges in the use of different tools for resistance training in COPD patients: a mixed-method study
author Freire, Ana Paula Coelho Figueira
author_facet Freire, Ana Paula Coelho Figueira
Uzeloto, Juliana Souza
Silva, Bruna Spolador De Alencar
Franco, Marcia Rodrigues Costa
Ramos, Dionei
Ramos, Ercy Mara Cipulo
author_role author
author2 Uzeloto, Juliana Souza
Silva, Bruna Spolador De Alencar
Franco, Marcia Rodrigues Costa
Ramos, Dionei
Ramos, Ercy Mara Cipulo
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Freire, Ana Paula Coelho Figueira
Uzeloto, Juliana Souza
Silva, Bruna Spolador De Alencar
Franco, Marcia Rodrigues Costa
Ramos, Dionei
Ramos, Ercy Mara Cipulo
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Pulmonary Disease
Exercise Training
Pulmonary Rehabilitation
Physical Therapy
Qualitative Methods
Doença Pulmonar
Treinamento Físico
Reabilitação Pulmonar
Fisioterapia
Método Qualitativo
topic Pulmonary Disease
Exercise Training
Pulmonary Rehabilitation
Physical Therapy
Qualitative Methods
Doença Pulmonar
Treinamento Físico
Reabilitação Pulmonar
Fisioterapia
Método Qualitativo
description ABSTRACT This study sought to quantify and qualitatively analyze the perception of physical therapists about facilitators and the challenges in the use of different types of tools for resistance training in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. This was a mixed-model study with qualitative analysis developed in a rehabilitation center. Six physical therapists who performed a randomized clinical trial were interviewed. The protocol consisted of the evaluation of three types of resistance training: elastic tubes, elastic bands, and training with conventional weight machines. After completion of the randomized trial, therapists were invited to participate in a focus group to collect qualitative data. Physical therapists also answered a quantitative questionnaire containing closed questions. The main outcome measures were the opinion of physical therapists about the advantages and disadvantages in clinical practice of each of the analyzed tools. The focus group analysis resulted in eight themes: Insecurities regarding load and handling tools, implementation of home-based treatment, improvements of tools, advantages and disadvantages of tools, incidence of injuries with elastic tools, patient’s preferences, and particularities of the tools. Physical therapists pointed out different challenges and facilitators for resistance training. Characteristics of the tools such as costs, portability, handling and practicality were cited as factors that influence clinical practice. In the quantitative analysis, no differences were observed when comparing the scores of each instrument. The three tools analyzed are applicable and feasible in the clinical practice of physical therapists; moreover, they present different characteristics and particularities that should be considered, such as cost, clinical applicability, portability and perception of the patient and therapists.
publishDate 2019
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2019-10-03T17:31:41Z
2019-10-03T17:31:41Z
2019-09-01
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1809-2950/18013926032019
Fisioterapia e Pesquisa. Universidade de São Paulo, v. 26, n. 3, p. 275-284, 2019.
1809-2950
http://hdl.handle.net/11449/183797
10.1590/1809-2950/18013926032019
S1809-29502019000300275
S1809-29502019000300275.pdf
9801061258149563
0000-0002-3310-7336
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1809-2950/18013926032019
http://hdl.handle.net/11449/183797
identifier_str_mv Fisioterapia e Pesquisa. Universidade de São Paulo, v. 26, n. 3, p. 275-284, 2019.
1809-2950
10.1590/1809-2950/18013926032019
S1809-29502019000300275
S1809-29502019000300275.pdf
9801061258149563
0000-0002-3310-7336
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv Fisioterapia e Pesquisa
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv 275-284
application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade de São Paulo
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade de São Paulo
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv SciELO
reponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESP
instname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
instacron:UNESP
instname_str Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
instacron_str UNESP
institution UNESP
reponame_str Repositório Institucional da UNESP
collection Repositório Institucional da UNESP
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1808129293441564672