Background: Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) requires long-term treatment that faces significant barriers, including inadequate physiotherapy services, especially in Slovenia and comparable European countries. Mobile health apps offer a promising solution to improve accessibility and adherence to KOA treatment. Objectives: This study aimed to identify expectations of patients with KOA for app-based therapy, determine the functional requirements, and assess the main barriers and benefits of using mobile apps for KOA management. It also examined these factors about demographic data (gender, age, and education level) and motivation to perform knee exercises. Methods: A mixed methods approach was used, integrating quantitative data from a structured questionnaire and qualitative data from in-depth interviews. The purposive sample comprised 82 patients with symptomatic KOA graded 1‐3 on the Kellgren-Lawrence scale, excluding those with cognitive impairments, wheelchair dependency, significant comorbidities, or language barriers. Results: The analysis revealed that 53.7% (44/82) of patients preferred smartphones, while 40.2% (33/82) favored PCs for remote KOA management, citing accessibility and convenience. Exercise videos received the highest rating (µ=9.45), followed by goal setting and tracking (µ=8.95) and regular e-messages (µ=8.83). Telephone consultations with physiotherapists were also highly valued (µ=8.41). Significant differences were observed in the perceived importance of key disease information (F₉=2.077; P=.04) and exercise videos (F₉=2.788; P=.05) based on motivation levels but not by gender, age, or education. Perceptions of the appropriate duration of physical activity varied with motivation levels (F₉=2.490; P=.02) but not with demographic factors. Men rated ease of use (4.93 vs 4.71; F₁=3.961; P=.05) and the clarity of the exercise flow display higher than women. The most significant barrier was inaccurate disease information (µ=3.96), with notable differences across age groups. Younger participants (younger than 40 years) and those aged 51‐60 years expressed concerns about time management and information accuracy. Patients highlighted the ability to rewatch exercises as a key app feature, while time efficiency and improved access to physiotherapists were highly valued for convenience. Enhanced communication and accurate information were essential for building trust and ensuring effective treatment. Conclusions: Mobile health apps for KOA management should be designed with a user-centered approach, prioritizing accessibility, motivation, and effective communication. Key functionalities include high-quality exercise videos, goal setting, symptom tracking, and regular electronic reminders. Mitigating user-reported barriers and integrating age-specific adaptations can enhance adherence and therapeutic outcomes. The findings highlight the potential of mobile health technologies to optimize KOA self-management and improve patient quality of life, particularly in health care systems with limited physiotherapy accessibility, such as those in Slovenia.

BACKGROUND: Since musculoskeletal disorders at work (MSDW) are very common among physiotherapists, we must introduce strategies that could help reduce their prevalence. The main objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of MSDW among physiotherapists, which parts of the body are most often affected, what are the ergonomic risk factors for MSDW among physiotherapists and what are strategies to reduce them. METHODS: In the systematic literature review, involving a total of 2127 physiotherapists, search terms such as occupational musculoskeletal disorders, physiotherapists, and occupational risk factors were used in the SCOPUS (n = 24), MEDLINE (n = 2), ScienceDirect (n = 103), PEDro (n = 0), Cumulative index of the nursing and allied health literature (n = 3), and PubMed (n = 30) databases in February 2024. The search included only original studies published in English, cross-sectional studies published in thepast 10 years, studies that included the prevalence of MSDW, and studies that included risk factors for MSDW. In the end, we included eight studies in the systematic review. RESULTS: A systematic review of eight studies highlighted the prevalence and risk factors associated with MSDW among physiotherapists. The studies were conducted on samples ranging in size from 75 to 501 individuals and focused on determining the prevalence of MSDW and identifying the associated risk factors. The prevalence rates differ, with the lower back region being the most affected region in all studies (38–68.8%), followed by the neck (10–59.2%) and the shoulder girdle (7–51.7%). Risk factors included back strain, awkward posture, prolonged posture, frequent bending/turning of the trunk, performing manual therapy techniques, patient lifting, repetitive tasks, work environment, and psychosocial issues. Reported coping strategies included changing one’s working posture, improving one’s body mechanics, and taking more breaks during the workday. CONCLUSION: Our systematic review of the literature revealed a high prevalence of MSDW among physical therapists (up to 92%) and highlighted the urgent need for strategies to mitigate this widespread problem. These findings highlight the multifaceted nature of the etiology of MSDW and point to the interplay of physical demands, ergonomic challenges, and psychological stressors that characterize the profession of a physical therapist.

This study aimed to address research gap concerning the perception of the care pathway for knee osteoarthritis (KOA) patients, focusing on both the patient and health professional perspectives in countries with inefficient health systems, such as Slovenia, by examining patient satisfaction with conservative treatment, assessing the perceptions of both patients and health professionals regarding the latter’s involvement, and justifying the chosen KOA treatment approaches. A mixed-methods approach was employed, combining quantitative surveys and qualitative interviews with KOA patients (n = 82) and healthcare professionals (n = 68). The care pathway for conservative KOA treatment in Slovenia begins with general practitioners (GPs), who conduct initial examinations, prescribe analgesics, and refer patients to radiologists and orthopaedic surgeons. GPs received high satisfaction ratings (μ = 4.32). Orthopaedic surgeons, who confirm diagnoses and create treatment plans involving physiotherapy, medication, or joint injections, also received high satisfaction scores (μ = 4.47), despite long waiting times. Consultations with radiologists, mentioned less frequently, again received high satisfaction scores (μ = 4.67). Physiotherapists, consulted later, received high satisfaction scores (μ = 4.16) but long waiting times resurfaced. Referrals to rheumatologists occur for systemic diseases or ineffective conservative treatments. Psychologists, occupational therapists, and dieticians are rarely consulted, indicating limited integration into the treatment pathway. A comparison of health professionals’ involvement showed that health professionals consider GP involvement less necessary (μ = 2.47) than patients do (μ = 2.82, p = 0.015). The same applies to radiologists (μ = 2.47 vs. μ = 2.87, p = 0.004), reflecting different views on diagnostic imaging. Our qualitative investigation revealed that, due to long waiting times, an alternative care pathway is developing with orthopaedic surgeons as the initial point of contact, bypassing GPs, and highlighted that patients and healthcare professionals differently perceive the latter’s treatment roles. The current conservative KOA care pathway lacks initial lifestyle change advice from the GP, referrals for conservative treatments, and a multidisciplinary team engaged in regular treatment monitoring and adjustment. Our mixed-methods research approach highlighted significant differences in perceptions of the treatment process and the roles of health professionals; the knowledge supplied of those differences should support experts and policymakers to optimise care pathways in Slovenia.

Telerehabilitation is increasingly used in knee osteoarthritis, but its effectiveness compared with structured home exercise and the role of physical therapist contact remain unclear. To address this, we aimed to investigate whether the clinical effectiveness of telerehabilitation for knee osteoarthritis is primarily attributable to the digital platform itself or to the extent and quality of physical therapist engagement within that platform. In this single-centre Randomised Controlled Trial (RCT), 118 patients with knee OA (Kellgren–Lawrence grade I–III) were allocated 1:1 to a 12-week telerehabilitation (TR; n=57) or booklet-based exercise programme (BB; n=61). Within the telerehabilitation group, participants were retrospectively stratified into those with Physical Therapist Contact (TR-C) and those without contact (TR-NC) for an exploratory analysis. Outcomes included knee pain (NRS, Numerical Rating Scale), Range Of Motion (ROM), WOMAC, physical activity (IPAQ), and health-related quality of life (SF-12). A post-hoc exploratory subgroup analysis was conducted and looked at the impact of a physical therapist with and without contact. A key component of the analysis was an exploratory subgroup comparison examining the role of physical therapist contact within the telerehabilitation group. Primary outcomes were analysed using mixed-model ANOVA, with exploratory subgroup comparisons. Both groups showed significant within-group improvements in pain, ROM, and WOMAC scores (all p ≤0.001), with no significant group × time interactions (p >0.05). Exploratory analysis identified significant differences based on physical therapist contact, with greater improvements in pain (p=0.009), knee flexion (p=0.041), and WOMAC Pain (p=0.047) among participants who engaged with the physical therapist. Participants without contact showed the smallest improvements. When stratified by physical therapist contact, participants receiving contact demonstrated greater improvements than those without contact, who showed the smallest gains. Telerehabilitation and booklet-based exercise programme provide comparable clinical outcomes at the group level. However, physical therapist engagement appears to be a key determinant of treatment response. These findings suggest that the effectiveness of TR depends more on clinical interaction than on digital delivery alone. Physical therapist contact may represent an important component influencing the effectiveness of telerehabilitation. It remains unclear whether telerehabilitation effectiveness stems from the digital platform, exercise content, or physical therapist guidance.

BACKGROUND: As older adults increasingly use mobile devices and high-speed Internet, telerehabilitation has become a potential model for improving the clinical management of individuals with knee osteoarthritis (KOA). METHODS: In the systematic literature review, search terms such as KOA, perception, satisfaction, telerehabilitation, and physiotherapy, were used in the PubMed, MEDLINE, SCOPUS and PEDro databases in October 2023. Only original articles written in English and published during the last ten years were included in the search. There were 16 studies listed in all. RESULTS: Online resources were used to provide interventions for KOA patients, including websites, mobile apps, phone calls, text messaging, social media, videoconferencing, and dedicated multi-technology systems. Overall, KOA patients used telerehabilitation very differently in terms of the type and application of this technology. Studies suggest that telerehabilitation is seen as a cost- and time-saver, characterised by anonymity, accessibility, and flexibility. Both physiotherapists and KOA patients expressed positive attitudes towards telerehabilitation, while patients expressed concerns about the lack of personal interaction with physiotherapists and the need for technical support, privacy, and security. Physiotherapists additionally expressed a lack of technical and communication skills, as well as financial concerns. CONCLUSION: Numerous studies have shown that KOA patients and physiotherapists have a positive attitude towards telerehabilitation. In addition to the technology-based exercise programme, self-directed telerehabilitation should include patient monitoring, biofeedback, or person-specific motivational messages.

BACKGROUND: Balance is essential to maintain and stabilize the transition from static to dynamic posture. The human body can maintain the center of gravity within the base of support and to process input from vision, the vestibular apparatus, and the somatic senses. AIM: The research aimed to check the correlation of the active body-weight shift test (Y balance test [YBT]) and two sudden perturbation tests in physiotherapy students. METHODS: In a cross-sectional study, a descriptive research design was used. Twenty-nine healthy adults (14 men and 15 women) with a mean age of 23.6 ± 6.3 were tested using the active body-weight shift test and two sudden perturbation tests. A descriptive statistical analysis using correlation coefficients was performed. RESULTS: Our subjects’ average values of the test results meet the normative values. There is a correlation between the YBT test and the crossover hop test in the anterior (p < 0.01), posterior-medial, and posterior-lateral directions (p < 0.05), and the triple-hop test forward in the posterior-medial and posterior-lateral directions (p < 0.05), and anterior direction (p < 0.01) for the left extremity, except for the anterior direction to the right. With the right extremity, there is a correlation between the YBT test and the crossover hop test and triple-hop test forward in the posterior medial (p < 0.05), the crossover hop test in the posterior medial and posterior lateral to the left (p < 0.05), and the right (p < 0.01), but no correlation in the anterior direction in either of them. CONCLUSION: The data of all physiotherapy students in our study meet the normative data, and no difference due to gender has been observed. There is a correlation between the active body-weight shift test and sudden perturbation tests with or without lateral movement for the left extremity, but not for the right extremity. We can assume better results when standing on an undominant limb, which can lead to insufficient support when standing on a dominant limb. What should not be the case in providing patient safety.