Original Research

Physiotherapist’s musculoskeletal imaging profiling questionnaire: Development, validation and pilot testing

Ogochukwu K.K Onyeso, Joseph O. Umunnah, Peter O. Ibikunle, Adesola C. Odole, Canice C. Anyachukwu, Charles I. Ezema, Maduabuchi J. Nwankwo
South African Journal of Physiotherapy | Vol 75, No 1 | a1338 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.4102/sajp.v75i1.1338 | © 2019 Ogochukwu K.K. Onyeso, Joseph O. Umunnah, Peter O. Ibikunle, Adesola C. Odole, Canice C. Anyachukwu, Charles I. Ezema, Maduabuchukwu J. Nwankwo | This work is licensed under CC Attribution 4.0
Submitted: 10 March 2019 | Published: 04 September 2019

About the author(s)

Ogochukwu K.K Onyeso, Department of Medical Rehabilitation, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Nigeria; and, Department of Medical Rehabilitation, Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka, Nigeria
Joseph O. Umunnah, Department of Medical Rehabilitation, Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka, Nigeria
Peter O. Ibikunle, Department of Medical Rehabilitation, Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka, Nigeria
Adesola C. Odole, Department of Physiotherapy, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria
Canice C. Anyachukwu, Department of Medical Rehabilitation, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Nigeria
Charles I. Ezema, Department of Medical Rehabilitation, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Nigeria
Maduabuchi J. Nwankwo, Department of Medical Rehabilitation, Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka, Nigeria


Share this article

Bookmark and Share

Abstract

Background: Many countries have started adopting musculoskeletal imaging as part of physiotherapy practice and their educational programmes are expected to bridge the gaps in training.

Objectives: To develop an instrument that can be used to explore the level and nature of training, attitude, competence and utilisation of musculoskeletal imaging among physiotherapists.

Method: An exploratory sequential mixed methods design was used. An in-depth international literature search was conducted, followed by a focus group discussion (FGD). The FGD informants were recruited through maximum variation sampling. The results of the FGD and the information from relevant literature were used to draft the physiotherapist’s musculoskeletal imaging profile questionnaire (PMIPQ). The PMIPQ was then subjected to face, content and criterion validity and pilot testing. The final version of the PMIPQ consists of six domains: (A) demographic details, (B) nature of training in musculoskeletal imaging, (C) level of training, (D) attitude towards musculoskeletal imaging, (E) utilisation and (F) competence. Data were analysed using means, standard deviation, Spearman’s correlation (ρ) and Cronbach’s alpha (α); SPSS 20 software (p ≤ 0.05).

Results: The results showed that the PMIPQ has good psychometric properties: validity and internal consistency. The test–retest reliability (p-value) across the domains was: C (0.973), D (0.979), E (0.842) and F (0.716).

Conclusion: Physiotherapist’s musculoskeletal imaging profile questionnaire is a relevant instrument for assessing the musculoskeletal imaging profile of physiotherapists in Nigeria and in other countries with a similar scope of training and practice.


Keywords

Imaging; Musculoskeletal; Physiotherapy; Profile; Questionnaire

Metrics

Total abstract views: 332
Total article views: 205


Crossref Citations

No related citations found.