The Task Force reviewed and discussed the available literature on the effectiveness of physiotherapy for acute and chronic critically ill adult patients. Evidence from randomized controlled trials or meta-analyses was limited and most of the recommendations were level C (evidence from uncontrolled or nonrandomized trials, or from observational studies) and D (expert opinion). However, the following evidence-based targets for physiotherapy were identified: deconditioning, impaired airway clearance, atelectasis, intubation avoidance, and weaning failure. Discrepancies and lack of data on the efficacy of physiotherapy in clinical trials support the need to identify guidelines for physiotherapy assessments, in particular to identify patient characteristics that enable treatments to be prescribed and modified on an individual basis. There is a need to standardize pathways for clinical decision-making and education, to define the professional profile of physiotherapists, and increase the awareness of the benefits of prevention and treatment of immobility and deconditioning for critically ill adult patients.

Compared with maximal exercise testing, submaximal exercise testing appears to have greater applicability to physical therapists in their role as clinical exercise specialists. This review contrasts maximal and submaximal exercise testing. Two major categories of submaximal tests (ie, predictive and performance tests) and their relative merits are described. Predictive tests are submaximal tests that are used to predict maximal aerobic capacity. Performance tests involve measuring the responses to standardized physical activities that are typically encountered in everyday life. To maximize the validity and reliability of data obtained from submaximal tests, physical therapists are cautioned to apply the tests selectively based on their indications; to adhere to methods, including the requisite number of practice sessions; and to use measurements such as heart rate, blood pressure, exertion, and pain to evaluate test performance and to safely monitor patients.

Part I of this two-part introduction to this Special Issue on the practice of physical therapy in the 21st century outlines the epidemiological basis and rationale for evidence-informed physical therapy practice for addressing contemporary health priorities. This evidence emanates from the definition of health by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Classification of Functioning (ICF), and WHO and other international databases on the prevalence of lifestyle conditions. Lifestyle conditions include ischemic heart disease, smoking-related conditions, hypertension and stroke, obesity, diabetes, and cancer. Epidemiological data combined with evidence supporting the effectiveness of noninvasive interventions related to physical therapy to address these priorities (e.g., health education and exercise) are highly consistent with the promotion of health and wellness and the ICF. Given their commitment to exploiting effective noninvasive interventions, physical therapists are in a preeminent position to focus on prevention of these disabling and lethal conditions in every client or patient, their cure in some cases, as well as their management. Thus, a compelling argument can be made that clinical competencies in 21st century physical therapy need to include assessment of smoking and smoking cessation (or at least its initiation), basic nutritional assessment and counseling, recommendations for physical activity and exercise, stress assessment and basic stress reduction recommendations, and sleep assessment and basic sleep hygiene recommendations. The physical therapist can then make an informed clinical judgment regarding whether a client or patient needs to be referred to another professional related to one or more of these specialty areas. The prominence of physical therapy as an established health care profession and its unique pattern of practice (prolonged visits over prolonged periods of time) attest further to the fact that physical therapists are uniquely qualified to lead in the assault on lifestyle conditions. Evidence-based physical therapy practiced within the context of epidemiological indicators (i.e., evidence-informed practice) maximally empowers clinicians to promote lifelong health in every person and in turn, the health of communities. This vision of physical therapy's leading role in health promotion and health care in the 21st century holds the promise of reducing the need for invasive health interventions (drugs and surgery). Part II of this introduction describes evidence-based physical therapy practice within this context of evidence-informed practice.

Purpose: Obtaining informed consent for the collection, storage, and future research use of biospecimens is challenging, as potentially complex and controversial information must be communicated clearly. We gathered input on a consent template developed for the Duke Biorepository from individuals representative of those who might one day consider contributing specimens. Methods: Forty subjects were recruited from the Durham, NC area and screened to achieve diversity by race/ethnicity, education, age, and sex. Cognitive interviews assessed participants' (a) understanding of information in the template, and (b) opinions about that information. Participants also completed a survey assessing trust in medical researchers. Results: Interviewees seemed to understand the template. Although responses were diverse, majority views emerged: more than half were comfortable with indefinite biospecimen storage, periodic contact to update information and to inform participants of additional research opportunities, the prospect that commercial products could be developed, and the fact that profits would not be shared. More than half were willing to provide medical record access, although this was a primary concern for others. More than two thirds were comfortable with not receiving individual research results as a matter of routine, but many thought they should be informed of findings with serious health implications. Lack of trust in researchers was associated with declining certain consent options. Conclusions: Protecting and promoting trust in research is essential to fostering widespread participation in biorepositories. Biorepositories should also devise ways to communicate clearly about the research being conducted and what is being learned. (Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2008;17(6):1440 -51)

No abstract