Ligart 1

Anna Ligart

Julia Baker

English 1301 280

3/28/2024

Comparing Patient Outcomes: Student Physical Therapists vs. Licensed Physical Therapists

In "Student Physical Therapists Achieve Similar Patient Outcomes as Licensed Physical

Therapists," Rindflesch and colleagues successfully use rhetorical tools like ethos, logos, and

proof to show that supervised student physical therapists (SPTs) and licensed physical therapists

manage low back pain (LBP) in a way that is similar to one another. The authors not only present

strong evidence but also clarify the importance of student involvement in clinical practice and

offer recommendations for future research through a careful review of the literature, a

transparent methodology, and clear data analysis.

The treatment of low back pain (LBP) is a major concern in healthcare since its incidence

has reached epidemic levels in the US. In physical therapy, since treatment methods' efficiency is

crucial, addressing this issue often comes under its responsibility. A critical investigation into the

success of supervised student physical therapists (SPTs) in comparison to their licensed

counterparts in managing low back pain (LBP) is presented in "Student Physical Therapists

Achieve Similar Patient Outcomes as Licensed Physical Therapists: A Retrospective Comparison

of Outcomes of Patients with Low Back Pain" by Aaron B. Rindflesch and colleagues. By

directly comparing the results of patients treated by supervised SPTs with those treated by
 Ligart 2

licensed PTs, this study closes a significant gap in the literature, concentrating on the treatment

of LBP. The goal of the authors' thorough statistical analysis and retrospective research design is

to offer important new information, a logical basis on the beneficial effects of SPT-led physical

therapy treatments in an orthopedic clinic.

A thorough analysis of the body of research and therapeutic recommendations related to

LBP treatment and physical therapy methods is the basis of Rindflesch and colleagues' thesis.

The writers provide an objective foundation for their research by carefully examining and

referencing a wide range of study results and recommendations, including those that deal with

clinical practice and categorization schemes. They draw attention to the lack of a commonly

accepted treatment protocol, which serves as the foundation for their analysis that compares

SPTs and licensed PTs. By appealing to readers' reason, the writers' thoughtful theoretical

framework—which is founded on legitimate research and beneficial guidelines—invites them to

critically analyze the authors' argument.

Additionally, the study's rigorous approach is improved by the authors' use of a mixed-

model analysis of variance to examine differences in outcomes between patients treated with

SPTs and PTs. Rindflesch and his colleagues support the validity of their findings by using

statistical methods to examine data gathered from electronic health records (EHRs) at an

outpatient orthopedic clinic. Because of their dependence on quantitative analysis, their

argument receives objectivity and readers feel obliged to consider the scientific evidence that

supports their conclusion. The writers strengthen readers' trust in the validity of the study and

enhance the logical coherence and proof of their argument via a methodical and transparent

approach to data analysis.

 Ligart 3

By outlining the technique used in their study, Rindflesch and colleagues not only

strengthen the logic of their argument but also provide credibility to it. The authors demonstrate

their commitment to ethical norms and research procedures by providing a thorough summary of

their research design, which includes the utilization of the Mayo Collaborative Model of Clinical

Education - which is an approach to medical training - and permission from the Institutional

Review Board, that is a group that checks research involving people to make sure it's done

ethically and follows rules. The writers' claims are given legitimacy by their dedication to ethics

and openness, which builds reader confidence and establishes them as respected authorities in the

field of physical therapy research.

Furthermore, the writers' ethos is strengthened, and their argument is given more weight

by their association with respectable organizations like the Mayo Clinic. The fact that Rindflesch

et al. are well-established experts in physical therapy adds a significant amount of knowledge

and experience to their research, which increases the validity of their conclusions. The study's

influence is strengthened when writers with a record of accomplishment of competence and

knowledge in their respective professions make results that readers are more likely to trust. This

institutional support highlights the importance of the study findings among the larger medical

community in addition to strengthening the research's credibility.

The scientific proof presented by Rindflesch et al. to bolster their claim that the outcomes

of LBP patients treated by SPTs are equivalent to those of licensed PTs forms the basis of their

argument. The authors present significant improvement in patient outcomes for both provider

groups using a thorough statistical analysis of Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) and Patient-

Specific Functional Scale (PSFS) scores. The writers use tables and box plots to summarize the

data and support their conclusions, which improves reader understanding. The writers' case is
 Ligart 4

further strengthened by this systematic use of evidence, which not only supports their arguments

but also makes the information easier for readers to understand and find convincing. To provide

a more comprehensive view of the patient experience under both SPT and professional PT

treatment, Rindflesch et al. combine qualitative data, such as patient testimonies and feedback, in

addition to the statistical analysis of outcome measures. The addition of qualitative data

highlights the real-world significance of their research for patient care and happiness while also

giving their conclusions more depth.

Moreover, Rindflesch and colleagues demonstrate a thorough understanding of the many

factors that could affect patient outcomes in their research. In addition to considering confusing

factors like patient demographics and clinical features, they also consider other variables

including adherence to treatments, length and intensity of sessions, and prior medical history.

The authors reduce the possibility of confused interpretations while also strengthening the

validity of their findings by carefully improving their analysis for these factors and using

additional research. This precise method to data analysis increases readers' trust in the reliability

and accuracy of the study's conclusions, strengthening the argument made by the evidence.

Additionally, their examination of multiple potential affecting aspects improves our

understanding of the complex connections between various factors that influence patient

outcomes, offering significant benefits to the area of physical therapy research.

Rindflesch and his colleagues make a strong case in "Student Physical Therapists

Achieve Similar Patient Outcomes as Licensed Physical Therapists," which is supported up by

solid research support, a clear methodology, and a careful review of the relevant literature. The

writers convince readers to accept their conclusion about the similarities in patient outcomes

between SPTs and licensed PTs by carefully employing rhetorical techniques including logos,
 Ligart 5

ethos, and proof. Rindflesch et al. successfully close the information barrier on the effectiveness

of supervised SPTs in managing LBP by engaging readers' reason, belief, and reliance on

scientific evidence, thus furthering the conversation in the field of physical therapy research.

Additionally, the thorough examination of patient outcomes along with the open

presentation of methods and any possible limitations strengthens the article's authority and

influence. The study's careful attention to detailing the methodology strengthens the credibility

of its conclusions by giving readers a better understanding of the approach used and improving

the argument's clarity. Though the authors effectively use rhetorical devices to strengthen their

claim, further investigation should examine other elements affecting patient outcomes, such as

cultural considerations, patient preferences, and socioeconomic issues. Given the circumstances,

"Student Physical Therapists Achieve Similar Patient Outcomes as Licensed Physical

Therapists" makes a significant addition to the field of physical therapy by emphasizing the

value of student participation in clinical practice under control and pointing out directions for

future research.
 Ligart 6

Works Cited

Rindflesch, Aaron B, Calley, Darren Q, Dobson, Benjamin J, Steele, Tess G, Yonkovich, Sarah

E, et al. "Student Physical Therapists Achieve Similar Patient Outcomes as Licensed

Physical Therapists: A Retrospective Comparison of Outcomes of Patients with Low Back

Pain." Journal of Physical Therapy Education, vol. 31, no. 4, 2017, pp. 35-39. ProQuest,

https://go.openathens.net/redirector/tamiu.edu?url=https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-

journals/student-physical-therapists-achieve-similar/docview/2066610512/se-2,

doi:https://doi.org/10.1097/JTE.0000000000000008.