Measuring adherence in clinic-based physiotherapy 25 was assumed that the status of the patient remained unchanged and that the physiotherapists’ method of assessment was standardized [14]. Completed questionnaires were returned to the researcher by the physiotherapists for processing. Sample size The sample size was calculated as follows. In general, reliability coefficients should be at least 0.9 to be interpretable at an individual patient level, while coefficients of at least 0.7 are acceptable at a group level [17]. So, the intended output of the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was 0.9, with 0.7 as the acceptable lower limit. With two raters for one patient, a sample of 18 participants would be enough for a hypothetical ICC of 0.9 with acceptable lower limit of 0.7 (power = 0.80 and α = 0.05) [18]. Since differentiating between musculoskeletal injuries and other diseases was needed, 36 participants were needed. Data analysis Data were analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 20 with an a-level set at 0.05. Data were screened for outliers and tested for normal distribution. Descriptive statistics were used to evaluate the baseline variables of the patients (age, gender, previous history of physiotherapy treatments, and physiotherapeutic diagnosis) and the physiotherapists (gender, completed Master’s degree, and years of professional experience in a primary physiotherapy practice). Variables were expressed in percentages or in the mean ± standard deviation with a range. The inter-rater reliability was evaluated using the intraclass correlation coefficient (2, 1): a two-way random effects single measures model with absolute agreement with a confidence interval of 95%. The ICC was calculated for all the participants, after which it was calculated for patients with musculoskeletal injuries and patients with chronic diseases separately. The ICC describes the compliance between two repeated measures and future repeated measures of adherence [19]. The ICC was interpreted based on the guidelines described by Cicchetti [20]: less than 0.40 = poor; between 0.40 and 0.59 = fair; between 0.60 and 0.74 = good; between 0.751.00 = excellent. Results Thirty-nine people were recruited: 17 males and 22 females. Three were asked to participate in training the physiotherapists to reach consensus about the use of the RAdMAT-NL and 36 participated in the study. Their demographic characteristics are shown in Table 1. Demographic characteristics of the six participating physiotherapists are shown in Table 2. Table 3 shows the mean scores of each rater per patient. The results show a high degree of congruence between the
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjY0ODMw