Exposure to Meta-Analysis During Graduate and Postgraduate Trainings Predicts the Good Knowledge and Use of Randomized Controlled Trials, Systematic Reviews, and Meta-Analyses Among Nigerian Physiotherapists

TL;DR

Nigerian physiotherapists with graduate training in meta-analysis have better knowledge and use of evidence-based practices like RCTs and systematic reviews.

Contribution

Identifies meta-analysis training and workplace libraries as key predictors of evidence-based practice knowledge among Nigerian physiotherapists.

Findings

Exposure to meta-analysis during training significantly predicts good knowledge of RCTs and systematic reviews.

Workplace medical libraries are associated with better knowledge of evidence-based practices.

Self-rated knowledge strongly predicts professional use of RCTs and meta-analyses.

Abstract

Background

Evidence-based practice (EBP) is essential for physiotherapy as an integral part of the multidisciplinary rehabilitation team. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), systematic reviews, and meta-analyses are the gold standard in the hierarchy of evidence. However, the extent of knowledge, attitudes, and professional use of RCTs and meta-analyses among physiotherapists in Nigeria remains unclear. Therefore, this study aimed to describe and explore the predictors of Nigerian physiotherapists’ knowledge, attitudes, and professional behaviors toward RCTs, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses.

Methods

In this observational study, an electronic version of an adapted questionnaire assessing the knowledge, attitudes, and professional use of RCTs and meta-analyses was shared across electronic platforms of Nigerian physiotherapy professional organizations.

Results

We found good overall knowledge (76 {80.8%}) and attitude (83 {88.3%}) toward the use of RCTs, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses for evaluating health interventions. Exposure to meta-analysis during graduate and postgraduate training (odds ratio {OR}, 7.102; 95% CI, 1.680-30.021; p = 0.008) and the presence of a medical library at the workplace (OR, 0.264; 95% CI, 0.070-0.997; p = 0.049) were significant predictors of good knowledge of RCTs, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses. Self-rated (OR, 56.476; 95% CI, 1.356-2357.430; p = 0.034) and overall levels of knowledge (OR, 0.013; 95% CI, 0.000-0.371; p = 0.011) predicted the good use of RCTs, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses among respondents.

Discussion

To equip physiotherapy practitioners with the requisite skill in using RCTs, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses, graduate and postgraduate trainings should prioritize education on the use of RCTs, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses to inform clinical decisions and practice, while capable workplaces may set up medical libraries to ease access and enhance the use of RCTs, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses.

Figures