Usage, Attitudes, Facilitators, and Barriers Toward Digital Health Technologies in Musculoskeletal Care: Survey Among Primary Care Physiotherapists in Norway.
Lars Martinsen, Nina Østerås, Tuva Moseng and 1 others
PMID 39283661WHAT IT FOUND
Only 46% of Norwegian physiotherapists use digital tools, mostly for treatment.
They avoid them for diagnosis due to limited physical exams. Positive attitudes exist, but lack of training and reimbursement barriers persist. Private practice uses them more than municipal services.
Key findings
0146.2% of surveyed physiotherapists offered digital health technologies, with private practice (55.9%) using them significantly more than municipality-employed therapists (36.3%).
02Therapists were significantly less confident using digital tools for evaluation and diagnosis compared to treatment, citing limited scope for physical examination as the primary disadvantage.
03A large majority disagreed that they had received training in using digital health technologies, which was a prominent barrier to adoption.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The response rate was low (6.8%), which may introduce volunteer bias, as therapists with positive experiences of digital health may have been more likely to respond. The study used a non-standardized questionnaire developed by the research group, which may affect the validity of comparisons with other studies. Findings are specific to Norwegian primary care and may not generalize to other countries or healthcare systems with different reimbursement models. The survey only included positively worded questions, which could have influenced response patterns.
Declared interests
None declared.
The easy way to misread this
Do not interpret the low use of advanced technologies like AI or VR as evidence that they are ineffective for musculoskeletal care. The study reports current usage and attitudes among therapists, not clinical outcomes of these specific tools. The low usage may reflect availability, cost, or lack of training rather than poor efficacy.