The Royal Dutch Society for Physical Therapy (KNGF) issued a clinical practice guideline for physical therapists that addresses the assessment and treatment of patients with nonspecific neck pain, including cervical radiculopathy, in Dutch primary care. Recommendations were based on a review of published systematic reviews.During the intake, the patient is screened for serious pathologies and corresponding patterns. Patients with cervical radiculopathy can be included or excluded through corresponding signs and symptoms and possibly diagnostic tests (Spurling test, traction/distraction test, and Upper Limb Tension Test). History taking is done to gather information about patients' limitations, course of pain, and prognostic factors (eg, coping style) and answers to health-related questions.In case of a normal recovery (treatment profile A), management should be hands-off, and patients should receive advice from the physical therapist and possibly some simple exercises to supplement "acting as usual."In case of a delayed/deviant recovery (treatment profile B), the physical therapist is advised to use, in addition to the recommendations for treatment profile A, forms of mobilization and/or manipulation in combination with exercise therapy. Other interventions may also be considered. The physical therapist is advised not to use dry needling, low-level laser, electrotherapy, ultrasound, traction, and/or a cervical collar.In case of a delayed/deviant recovery with clear and/or dominant psychosocial prognostic factors (treatment profile C), these factors should first be addressed by the physical therapist, when possible, or the patient should be referred to a specialist, when necessary.In case of neck pain grade III (treatment profile D), the therapy resembles that for profile B, but the use of a cervical collar for pain reduction may be considered. The advice is to use it sparingly: only for a short period per day and only for a few weeks.

Objective: The purpose of this paper is to revise the 2010 Dutch guideline for physical therapy (PT) in patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis (OA), issued by the Royal Dutch Society for Physical Therapy (KNGF). Method: This revised guideline was developed according to the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) and Guidelines International Network (G-IN) standards. A multidisciplinary guideline panel formulated clinical questions based on perceived barriers to current care. A narrative or systematic literature review was undertaken in response to each clinical question. The panel formulated recommendations based on evidence and additional considerations, as described in the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) Evidence-to-Decision framework. Results: A comprehensive assessment should be based on the International Classification of Functioning Disability and Health (ICF) core set for OA, including the identification of OA-related red flags. Based on the assessment, four treatment profiles were distinguished: (1) education and instructions for unsupervised exercises, (2) education and short-term supervised exercise therapy, (3) education and longer term supervised exercise therapy, and (4) education and exercise therapy before and/or after total hip or knee surgery. Education included individualized information, advice, instructions, and self-management support. Exercise programs were tailored to individual OA-related issues, were adequately dosed, and were in line with public health recommendations for physical activity. Recommended measurement instruments included the Patient-Specific Complaints Instrument, the Numeric Pain Rating Scale, the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score/the Knee Injury Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, and the Six Minute Walk Test. Conclusion: An evidence-based PT guideline for the management of patients with hip or knee OA was developed. To improve quality of care for these patients, an extensive implementation strategy is necessary.

Building a registry and implementing PROMs in physical therapist practices are feasible. The routine use of PROMs needs to increase to ensure valid feedback of outcomes. Using knowledge brokers is promising for implementing the program via peer assessment workshops.

J. van der Wees (2021) Exploring the perspective of patients with musculoskeletal health problems in primary care on the use of patient-reported outcome measures to stimulate quality improvement in physiotherapist practice; a qualitative study,