Musculoskeletal DiseasesDirectPhysioNCT07443098
Front Line Agreement in Diagnosis and Treatment for Musculoskeletal Dysfunctions
A study testing Intervention: ED - physiotherapist group in people with Musculoskeletal Diseases and Low Back Pain, run by Bern University of Applied Sciences at 1 site in Switzerland.
Trial summary
Background: This randomized study, conducted from October to December 2023 in the emergency department of Bethesda Hospital Basel, Switzerland, investigated a new model of care for patients presenting with non-urgent musculoskeletal disorders (MSKDs). Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 79 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Musculoskeletal Diseases, Low Back Pain, Emergency Service, Hospital
- What is being tested?
- Intervention: ED - physiotherapist group
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 102 participants
- Where
- 1 siteSwitzerland
- Study dates
- 3 Oct 2023to 31 Jan 2024
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 79 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Patients aged 18 to 79 years presenting with non-serious musculoskeletal conditions
- report a pain intensity between 3 and 7 on a 0-10 Numeric Rating Scale (NRS).
Who cannot join
- major trauma, fracture
- systemic signs (e.g., fever or unexplained profuse sweating)
- progressive neurological deficits (i.e., severe sensory loss or weakness)
- cauda equina syndrome with bladder or bowel dysfunction
- progressive deterioration of the general condition
- severe acute medical distress (e.g., suspected myocardial infarction)
Show all 9Show fewer
- allergic reaction with or without skin rashes
- acute mental illness (psychological condition)
- Patients who are unwilling or unable to provide informed consent or lacking decision-making capacity.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: The Direct Physio Project Front Line Agreement in Diagnosis and Treatment for Musculoskeletal Dysfunctions. A Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Study
Background: This randomized study, conducted from October to December 2023 in the emergency department of Bethesda Hospital Basel, Switzerland, investigated a new model of care for patients presenting with non-urgent musculoskeletal disorders (MSKDs). It was initiated in response to two major challenges in the Swiss healthcare system: a shortage of general practitioners and a rising number of ED visits for conditions such as back, neck, and shoulder pain, sprains, and other joint or muscle complaints without serious underlying pathology. Internationally, Advanced Physiotherapy Practice (APP) roles, in which specially trained physiotherapists independently assess, diagnose, treat, and discharge patients with appropriate MSKDs, have been successfully implemented in emergency settings, but this model is still novel in Switzerland, and local evidence on safety and comparability to medical care is lacking.
Methods: A total of 102 patients with musculoskeletal complaints and no signs of serious structural or systemic disease were included after informed consent. Patients were randomly assigned either to an intervention group, managed by physiotherapists working in an advanced practice role, or to a control group receiving standard care from resident physicians. Senior physicians, acting as reference standard, reviewed clinical findings, diagnoses, treatment recommendations, and discharge decisions from both groups. Agreement between each provider group and senior physicians was quantified using established measures of inter-rater reliability, specifically Cohen's Kappa (κ) and Gwet's AC1, to determine concordance beyond chance.
Conclusions: This study aims to determine whether advanced practice physiotherapists can provide clinical decision-making comparable to resident physicians for non-urgent MSKDs in the ED. Demonstrating high levels of agreement in diagnosis, management, and discharge planning would support the safe integration of APP roles into Swiss emergency workflows, with potential benefits including reduced waiting times, more efficient use of physician resources, improved patient flow, and maintenance of high standards of care and patient safety, thereby informing workforce planning and task-sharing strategies in acute care.
Read the detailed description
The study will be conducted between October and December 2023 in the emergency department (ED) of Bethesda Hospital Basel (BSAG), Switzerland, to evaluate a new model of care for patients presenting with non-urgent musculoskeletal conditions (MSKDs). This study was motivated by two major challenges in the Swiss healthcare system: a shortage of general practitioners and an increasing number of ED visits for conditions such as back pain, neck pain, shoulder pain, sprains, and other joint or muscle complaints that do not involve serious structural injury or underlying disease.
Internationally, Advanced Physiotherapy Practice (APP) roles have been successfully implemented in emergency departments. In this model, specially trained physiotherapists assess, diagnose, treat, and discharge patients with appropriate musculoskeletal complaints, working alongside medical staff.
While this approach has been successfully implemented internationally, it remains relatively new in Switzerland, and evidence was needed to determine whether it is safe and comparable to standard medical care in the ED setting.
The aim of this study was to evaluate the level of agreement in diagnosis, treatment decisions, and discharge planning between physiotherapists and resident physicians, using senior physicians as the reference standard. A total of 102 patients presenting with musculoskeletal complaints without signs of serious underlying or structural pathology were included. After providing consent, patients were randomly assigned to one of two groups: the intervention group, in which they were assessed and managed by physiotherapists working in an advanced practice role, or the control group, in which they received standard care from resident physicians.
To ensure patient safety and provide a benchmark for comparison, senior physicians reviewed the clinical findings, diagnoses, treatment recommendations, and discharge decisions from both groups. The degree of agreement between each group and the senior physicians was analyzed using established statistical measures of inter-rater reliability, specifically Cohen's Kappa (κ) and Gwet's AC1. These methods quantify how closely clinical decisions align beyond what would be expected by chance.
This study is highly relevant for patients and families, as it explores whether qualified physiotherapists can safely and effectively manage non-urgent musculoskeletal cases in the emergency department. If agreement levels are high, this would support the safe integration of advanced practice physiotherapists into ED workflows. Potential benefits include reduced waiting times, more efficient use of physician resources, and improved patient flow, while maintaining high standards of care and patient safety.
For healthcare providers and policymakers, the findings contribute important evidence regarding task-sharing and interprofessional collaboration in acute care settings. Demonstrating comparable clinical decision-making between physiotherapists and resident physicians could support workforce innovation, help address physician shortages, and inform future healthcare planning in Switzerland. Overall, the study provides structured and objective data on the feasibility and safety of implementing Advanced Physiotherapy Practice within a Swiss emergency department context.
- Conditions
- Musculoskeletal Diseases, Low Back Pain, Emergency Service, Hospital, Physical Therapy Modalities, Diagnostic Techniques and Procedures, Clinical Competence
- Being tested
- Intervention: ED - physiotherapist group, Control: resident physician group
- Keywords
- Diagnostic & management, emergency department, musculoskeletal disorders, advanced practice physiotherapy, RCT
- Medical subject headings
- Musculoskeletal Diseases, Low Back Pain, Emergencies, Disease
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Intervention: ED - physiotherapist groupDiagnostic test
All patients in the ED-PT groups (3 subgroups) will undergo a medical history assessment and standardized red flag screening (Boissonnault, 2011; Lüdtke, 2021) to exclude non-musculoskeletal causes. The questionnaire will be signed by both the patient and the ED-PT. Patients with identified red flags will be excluded before randomization. Additionally, all cases will be reviewed by a senior physician to ensure safety. After exclusion of red flags, the ED-PT will perform the clinical assessment, establish a provisional diagnosis, and develop a management and discharge plan. All data will be recorded in a case report form (CRF). Before discharge, a senior physician will review and confirm the plan (yes/no) and retain final medical responsibility. A written report to the GP will conclude the ED consultation.
Control: resident physician groupDiagnostic test
Resident physicians (RPs) will perform the initial clinical assessment and propose a diagnosis and management plan, which will be reviewed and approved by a senior physician prior to discharge, in accordance with standard emergency department procedures at Bethesda Hospital AG (BSAG). The same predefined clinical workflow will be applied in both groups (RP and ED-PT).
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Intervention Arm (Advanced Practice Physiotherapist-Led Care) | Experimental | All patients in the ED-PT groups (3 subgroups) will undergo a medical history assessment and standardized red flag screening (Boissonnault, 2011; Lüdtke, 2021) to exclude non-musculoskeletal causes. The questionnaire will be signed by both the patient and the ED-PT. Patients with identified red flags will be excluded before randomization. Additionally, all cases will be reviewed by a senior physician to ensure safety.
After exclusion of red flags, the ED-PT will perform the clinical assessment, establish a provisional diagnosis, and develop a management and discharge plan. All data will be recorded in a CRF. Before discharge, a senior physician will review and confirm the plan (yes/no) and retain final medical responsibility. A written report to the GP will conclude the ED consultation. Receives: Diagnostic Test: Intervention: ED - physiotherapist group |
| Experimental: Control Arm (Resident physician-Led Care) | Active comparator | Resident physicians (RPs) will perform the initial clinical assessment and propose a diagnosis and management plan, which will be reviewed and approved by a senior physician prior to discharge, in accordance with standard emergency department procedures at Bethesda Hospital AG (BSAG). The same predefined clinical workflow will be applied in both groups (RP and ED-PT). Receives: Diagnostic Test: Control: resident physician group |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Agreement
Description:The primary outcome will be the level of agreement, measured using Cohen's Kappa (κ) and Gwet's AC1 (AC1), regarding diagnosis and follow-up recommendations between ED-PTs resp. residents (control group), and the senior physician.
Measured: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 13 weeks.
Diagnostic Competence APP
Cohen's Kappa (κ) and Gwet's AC1 (AC1) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for the review of the diagnosis and follow-up recommendations
Measured: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 13 weeks
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted2 Mar 2026
- Study start3 Oct 2023
- Primary completion23 Dec 2023
- Study completion31 Jan 2024
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (6)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Musculoskeletal DiseasesStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- This study will use a prospective, randomized, controlled, single-center interventional design conducted in the emergency department of Bethesda Hospital Basel. Eligible adult patients presenting with non-urgent musculoskeletal conditions will be randomly assigned to either assessment and management by an Advanced Practice Physiotherapist (intervention group) or standard care by a resident physician (control group). Randomization will be performed using concealed allocation with sealed envelopes. In both groups, diagnoses, treatment recommendations, and discharge decisions will be reviewed by a senior physician, who will serve as the reference standard. The study will compare agreement in clinical decision-making between groups to evaluate the safety and competence of advanced physiotherapy practice in the emergency department setting.
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 102 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Bern University of Applied Sciences
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Amir Tal, Bern University of Applied Sciences
- Investigators
- Amir Tal, PhD, Principal investigator, Bern University of Applied Sciences
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07443098
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- Bern UniversityApplied Science
- Other IDs
- 2023-01399, 2023
- Acronym
- DirectPhysio
- Status last verified
- Mar 2026
- First submitted
- 25 Feb 2026
- Last updated
- 10 Mar 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No: The informed consent obtained from participants did not include explicit provisions for public sharing of individual-level data beyond the research team. In accordance with Swiss data protection regulations and institutional policies, data access is therefore restricted to authorized study personnel.
Publications
Winteler, B., Geese, F., Lehmann, B., & Schmitt, K.-U. (2022). Musculoskeletal Physiotherapy in the Emergency Department - Evaluation of a New Physiotherapy Service in a Swiss University Hospital. Physioscience, 18(02), 69-76. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1500-1077
Goodwin RW, Hendrick PA. Physiotherapy as a first point of contact in general practice: a solution to a growing problem? Prim Health Care Res Dev. 2016 Sep;17(5):489-502. doi: 10.1017/S1463423616000189. Epub 2016 Jun 6.
PubMed 27263326Ferreira GE, Traeger AC, Maher CG. Review article: A scoping review of physiotherapists in the adult emergency department. Emerg Med Australas. 2019 Feb;31(1):43-57. doi: 10.1111/1742-6723.12987. Epub 2018 Apr 17.
PubMed 29664184Downie F, McRitchie C, Monteith W, Turner H. Physiotherapist as an alternative to a GP for musculoskeletal conditions: a 2-year service evaluation of UK primary care data. Br J Gen Pract. 2019 May;69(682):e314-e320. doi: 10.3399/bjgp19X702245. Epub 2019 Apr 8.
PubMed 30962224de Gruchy A, Granger C, Gorelik A. Physical Therapists as Primary Practitioners in the Emergency Department: Six-Month Prospective Practice Analysis. Phys Ther. 2015 Sep;95(9):1207-16. doi: 10.2522/ptj.20130552. Epub 2015 Apr 30.
PubMed 25929528Bird S, Thompson C, Williams KE. Primary contact physiotherapy services reduce waiting and treatment times for patients presenting with musculoskeletal conditions in Australian emergency departments: an observational study. J Physiother. 2016 Oct;62(4):209-14. doi: 10.1016/j.jphys.2016.08.005. Epub 2016 Aug 24.
PubMed 27637771
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 10 Mar 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- The Direct Physio Project Front Line Agreement in Diagnosis and Treatment for Musculoskeletal Dysfunctions. A Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Study
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07443098
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- DirectPhysio / Bern UniversityApplied Science
- Conditions
- Musculoskeletal Diseases, Low Back Pain, Emergency Service, Hospital, Physical Therapy Modalities, Diagnostic Techniques and Procedures, Clinical Competence
- Keywords
- Diagnostic & management, emergency department, musculoskeletal disorders, advanced practice physiotherapy, RCT
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 102 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Bern University of Applied SciencesUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 3 Oct 2023 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 23 Dec 2023 (actual)
- Study completion
- 31 Jan 2024 (actual)
- First posted
- 2 Mar 2026 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Background: This randomized study, conducted from October to December 2023 in the emergency department of Bethesda Hospital Basel, Switzerland, investigated a new model of care for patients presenting with non-urgent musculoskeletal disorders (MSKDs). It was initiated in response to two major challenges in the Swiss healthcare system: a shortage of general practitioners and a rising number of ED visits for conditions such as back, neck, and shoulder pain, sprains, and other joint or muscle complaints without serious underlying pathology. Internationally, Advanced Physiotherapy Practice (APP) roles, in which specially trained physiotherapists independently assess, diagnose, treat, and discharge patients with appropriate MSKDs, have been successfully implemented in emergency settings, but this model is still novel in Switzerland, and local evidence on safety and comparability to medical care is lacking.
Methods: A total of 102 patients with musculoskeletal complaints and no signs of serious structural or systemic disease were included after informed consent. Patients were randomly assigned either to an intervention group, managed by physiotherapists working in an advanced practice role, or to a control group receiving standard care from resident physicians. Senior physicians, acting as reference standard, reviewed clinical findings, diagnoses, treatment recommendations, and discharge decisions from both groups. Agreement between each provider group and senior physicians was quantified using established measures of inter-rater reliability, specifically Cohen's Kappa (κ) and Gwet's AC1, to determine concordance beyond chance.
Conclusions: This study aims to determine whether advanced practice physiotherapists can provide clinical decision-making comparable to resident physicians for non-urgent MSKDs in the ED. Demonstrating high levels of agreement in diagnosis, management, and discharge planning would support the safe integration of APP roles into Swiss emergency workflows, with potential benefits including reduced waiting times, more efficient use of physician resources, improved patient flow, and maintenance of high standards of care and patient safety, thereby informing workforce planning and task-sharing strategies in acute care.
Detailed description
The study will be conducted between October and December 2023 in the emergency department (ED) of Bethesda Hospital Basel (BSAG), Switzerland, to evaluate a new model of care for patients presenting with non-urgent musculoskeletal conditions (MSKDs). This study was motivated by two major challenges in the Swiss healthcare system: a shortage of general practitioners and an increasing number of ED visits for conditions such as back pain, neck pain, shoulder pain, sprains, and other joint or muscle complaints that do not involve serious structural injury or underlying disease.
Internationally, Advanced Physiotherapy Practice (APP) roles have been successfully implemented in emergency departments. In this model, specially trained physiotherapists assess, diagnose, treat, and discharge patients with appropriate musculoskeletal complaints, working alongside medical staff.
While this approach has been successfully implemented internationally, it remains relatively new in Switzerland, and evidence was needed to determine whether it is safe and comparable to standard medical care in the ED setting.
The aim of this study was to evaluate the level of agreement in diagnosis, treatment decisions, and discharge planning between physiotherapists and resident physicians, using senior physicians as the reference standard. A total of 102 patients presenting with musculoskeletal complaints without signs of serious underlying or structural pathology were included. After providing consent, patients were randomly assigned to one of two groups: the intervention group, in which they were assessed and managed by physiotherapists working in an advanced practice role, or the control group, in which they received standard care from resident physicians.
To ensure patient safety and provide a benchmark for comparison, senior physicians reviewed the clinical findings, diagnoses, treatment recommendations, and discharge decisions from both groups. The degree of agreement between each group and the senior physicians was analyzed using established statistical measures of inter-rater reliability, specifically Cohen's Kappa (κ) and Gwet's AC1. These methods quantify how closely clinical decisions align beyond what would be expected by chance.
This study is highly relevant for patients and families, as it explores whether qualified physiotherapists can safely and effectively manage non-urgent musculoskeletal cases in the emergency department. If agreement levels are high, this would support the safe integration of advanced practice physiotherapists into ED workflows. Potential benefits include reduced waiting times, more efficient use of physician resources, and improved patient flow, while maintaining high standards of care and patient safety.
For healthcare providers and policymakers, the findings contribute important evidence regarding task-sharing and interprofessional collaboration in acute care settings. Demonstrating comparable clinical decision-making between physiotherapists and resident physicians could support workforce innovation, help address physician shortages, and inform future healthcare planning in Switzerland. Overall, the study provides structured and objective data on the feasibility and safety of implementing Advanced Physiotherapy Practice within a Swiss emergency department context.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- This study will use a prospective, randomized, controlled, single-center interventional design conducted in the emergency department of Bethesda Hospital Basel. Eligible adult patients presenting with non-urgent musculoskeletal conditions will be randomly assigned to either assessment and management by an Advanced Practice Physiotherapist (intervention group) or standard care by a resident physician (control group). Randomization will be performed using concealed allocation with sealed envelopes. In both groups, diagnoses, treatment recommendations, and discharge decisions will be reviewed by a senior physician, who will serve as the reference standard. The study will compare agreement in clinical decision-making between groups to evaluate the safety and competence of advanced physiotherapy practice in the emergency department setting.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Intervention Arm (Advanced Practice Physiotherapist-Led Care) | Experimental | Diagnostic Test: Intervention: ED - physiotherapist groupAll patients in the ED-PT groups (3 subgroups) will undergo a medical history assessment and standardized red flag screening (Boissonnault, 2011; Lüdtke, 2021) to exclude non-musculoskeletal causes. The questionnaire will be signed by both the patient and the ED-PT. Patients with identified red flags will be excluded before randomization. Additionally, all cases will be reviewed by a senior physician to ensure safety. After exclusion of red flags, the ED-PT will perform the clinical assessment, establish a provisional diagnosis, and develop a management and discharge plan. All data will be recorded in a CRF. Before discharge, a senior physician will review and confirm the plan (yes/no) and retain final medical responsibility. A written report to the GP will conclude the ED consultation. |
| Experimental: Control Arm (Resident physician-Led Care) | Active comparator | Diagnostic Test: Control: resident physician groupResident physicians (RPs) will perform the initial clinical assessment and propose a diagnosis and management plan, which will be reviewed and approved by a senior physician prior to discharge, in accordance with standard emergency department procedures at Bethesda Hospital AG (BSAG). The same predefined clinical workflow will be applied in both groups (RP and ED-PT). |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 79 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Patients aged 18 to 79 years presenting with non-serious musculoskeletal conditions
- report a pain intensity between 3 and 7 on a 0-10 Numeric Rating Scale (NRS).
Key exclusion criteria (9 listed)
- major trauma, fracture
- systemic signs (e.g., fever or unexplained profuse sweating)
- progressive neurological deficits (i.e., severe sensory loss or weakness)
- cauda equina syndrome with bladder or bowel dysfunction
- progressive deterioration of the general condition
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Intervention: ED - physiotherapist groupAll patients in the ED-PT groups (3 subgroups) will undergo a medical history assessment and standardized red flag screening (Boissonnault, 2011; Lüdtke, 2021) to exclude non-musculoskeletal causes. The questionnaire will be signed by both the patient and the ED-PT. Patients with identified red flags will be excluded before randomization. Additionally, all cases will be reviewed by a senior physician to ensure safety. After exclusion of red flags, the ED-PT will perform the clinical assessment, establish a provisional diagnosis, and develop a management and discharge plan. All data will be recorded in a case report form (CRF). Before discharge, a senior physician will review and confirm the plan (yes/no) and retain final medical responsibility. A written report to the GP will conclude the ED consultation. | Diagnostic test | Intervention Arm (Advanced Practice Physiotherapist-Led Care) |
| Control: resident physician groupResident physicians (RPs) will perform the initial clinical assessment and propose a diagnosis and management plan, which will be reviewed and approved by a senior physician prior to discharge, in accordance with standard emergency department procedures at Bethesda Hospital AG (BSAG). The same predefined clinical workflow will be applied in both groups (RP and ED-PT). | Diagnostic test | Experimental: Control Arm (Resident physician-Led Care) |
Primary outcome
Agreement
Time frame: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 13 weeks.
Description:The primary outcome will be the level of agreement, measured using Cohen's Kappa (κ) and Gwet's AC1 (AC1), regarding diagnosis and follow-up recommendations between ED-PTs resp. residents (control group), and the senior physician.
Diagnostic Competence APP
Time frame: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 13 weeks
Cohen's Kappa (κ) and Gwet's AC1 (AC1) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for the review of the diagnosis and follow-up recommendations
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 10 Mar 2026.
- BackgroundWinteler, B., Geese, F., Lehmann, B., & Schmitt, K.-U. (2022). Musculoskeletal Physiotherapy in the Emergency Department - Evaluation of a New Physiotherapy Service in a Swiss University Hospital. Physioscience, 18(02), 69-76. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1500-1077
- Background: PubMed 27263326Goodwin RW, Hendrick PA. Physiotherapy as a first point of contact in general practice: a solution to a growing problem? Prim Health Care Res Dev. 2016 Sep;17(5):489-502. doi: 10.1017/S1463423616000189. Epub 2016 Jun 6.
- Background: PubMed 29664184Ferreira GE, Traeger AC, Maher CG. Review article: A scoping review of physiotherapists in the adult emergency department. Emerg Med Australas. 2019 Feb;31(1):43-57. doi: 10.1111/1742-6723.12987. Epub 2018 Apr 17.
- Background: PubMed 30962224Downie F, McRitchie C, Monteith W, Turner H. Physiotherapist as an alternative to a GP for musculoskeletal conditions: a 2-year service evaluation of UK primary care data. Br J Gen Pract. 2019 May;69(682):e314-e320. doi: 10.3399/bjgp19X702245. Epub 2019 Apr 8.
- Background: PubMed 25929528de Gruchy A, Granger C, Gorelik A. Physical Therapists as Primary Practitioners in the Emergency Department: Six-Month Prospective Practice Analysis. Phys Ther. 2015 Sep;95(9):1207-16. doi: 10.2522/ptj.20130552. Epub 2015 Apr 30.
- Background: PubMed 27637771Bird S, Thompson C, Williams KE. Primary contact physiotherapy services reduce waiting and treatment times for patients presenting with musculoskeletal conditions in Australian emergency departments: an observational study. J Physiother. 2016 Oct;62(4):209-14. doi: 10.1016/j.jphys.2016.08.005. Epub 2016 Aug 24.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. The informed consent obtained from participants did not include explicit provisions for public sharing of individual-level data beyond the research team. In accordance with Swiss data protection regulations and institutional policies, data access is therefore restricted to authorized study personnel.
Related trials for Musculoskeletal Diseases
Not yet recruitingPhase 2
Extension Study of Safety and Tolerability of DDY391 in Participants With Moderate to Severe Psoriatic Arthritis (CDDY391A12201-extension)
Moderate to Severe Psoriatic Arthritis
RecruitingPhase 2
Study of PTC844 in Participants With Active Rheumatoid Arthritis
Rheumatoid Arthritis
RecruitingPhase 1/2
A First-in-human Study of KK8123 in Adults With X-linked Hypophosphatemia
X-linked Hypophosphatemia
Recruiting
Effects of Cervicothoracic Mobilization in Patients With Supraspinatus Tendinitis
Rotator Cuff Tendonitis
Not yet recruitingPhase 1
An Ascending Dose Study of DKB903 in Participants With Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) and Participants With Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE)
Rheumatoid Arthritis and Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Amir Tal, PhD principal investigator
Bern University of Applied Sciences
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Intervention: ED - physiotherapist group in people with Musculoskeletal Diseases and Low Back Pain, run by Bern University of Applied Sciences at 1 site in Switzerland.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 2 inclusion and 9 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 10 Mar 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Switzerland. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Agreement (time frame: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 13 weeks.). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT07443098, which also lists 6 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 10 Mar 2026.