The Association of Physiotherapy Continuity of Care with Duration of Time Loss Among Compensated Australian Workers with Low Back Pain.

This is an observational claims study, so it shows an association, not that seeing the same physiotherapist caused shorter time off work. Workers who were dissatisfied or not recovering may have sought different physiotherapists, which could make low continuity look like the cause of longer time loss. Only claims from Victoria and South Australia were used because those jurisdictions had a unique code for each treating physiotherapist. Claims with fewer than four physiotherapy encounters were excluded, so the findings do not apply to workers who had very little physiotherapy. 321 claims were removed because covariate information was missing. Time loss was measured as cumulative calendar weeks of income support, which may not reflect part-time work or partial return to work. The analysis assumed one return-to-work event and did not account for relapses. Services paid outside the workers’ compensation system were not captured. Non-physiotherapy treatment that could support or hinder recovery was not accounted for. The measure did not capture how workers experienced continuity, information transfer between providers, or relationship quality. Only covariates available in administrative data were adjusted for, so other factors may have influenced both continuity and time loss. Time loss was censored at 104 weeks, so very long cases were not followed beyond that point.

Do not conclude that seeing the same physiotherapist causes a faster return to work. This observational claims study cannot separate that association from workers seeking different providers because recovery was not progressing, and it did not capture treatment outside workers’ compensation or non-physiotherapy care.