Dienst van SURF
© 2025 SURF
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: High-velocity low-amplitude thrust spinal manipulation (SM) is a recommended and commonly used manual therapy intervention in physiotherapy. Beliefs surrounding the safety and effectiveness of SM have challenged its use, and even advocated for its abandonment. Our study aimed to investigate the knowledge and beliefs surrounding SM by Italian physiotherapists compared with similar practitioners in other countries.METHODS: An online survey with 41 questions was adapted from previous surveys and was distributed via a mailing list of the Italian Physiotherapists Association (March 22-26, 2020). The questionnaire was divided into 4 sections to capture information on participant demographics, utilization, potential barriers, and knowledge about SM. Questions were differentiated between spinal regions. Attitudes towards different spinal regions, attributes associated with beliefs, and the influence of previous educational background were each evaluated.RESULTS: Of the 7398 registered physiotherapists, 575 (7.8%) completed the survey and were included for analysis. The majority of respondents perceived SM as safe and effective when applied to the thoracic (74.1%) and lumbar (72.2%) spines; whereas, a smaller proportion viewed SM to the upper cervical spine (56.8%) as safe and effective. Respondents reported they were less likely to provide and feel comfortable with upper cervical SM (respectively, 27.5% and 48.5%) compared to the thoracic (respectively, 52.2% and 74.8%) and lumbar spines (respectively, 46.3% and 74.3%). Most physiotherapists (70.4%) agreed they would perform additional screening prior to upper cervical SM compared to other spinal regions. Respondents who were aware of clinical prediction rules were more likely to report being comfortable with SM (OR 2.38-3.69) and to perceive it as safe (OR 1.75-3.12). Finally, physiotherapists without musculoskeletal specialization, especially those with a traditional manual therapy background, were more likely to perform additional screening prior to SM, use SM less frequently, report being less comfortable performing SM, and report upper cervical SM as less safe (p < 0.001).DISCUSSION: The beliefs and attitudes of physiotherapists surrounding the use of SM are significantly different when comparing the upper cervical spine to other spinal regions. An educational background in traditional manual therapy significantly influences beliefs and attitudes. We propose an updated framework on evidence-based SM.
Teacher beliefs have been shown to play a major role in shaping educational practice, especially in the area of grammar teaching―an area of language education that teachers have particularly strong views on. Traditional grammar education is regularly criticized for its focus on rules-of-thumb rather than on insights from modern linguistics, and for its focus on lower order thinking. A growing body of literature on grammar teaching promotes the opposite, arguing for more linguistic conceptual knowledge and reflective or higher order thinking in grammar pedagogy. In the Netherlands, this discussion plays an important role in the national development of a new curriculum. This study explores current Dutch teachers’ beliefs on the use of modern linguistic concepts and reflective judgment in grammar teaching. To this end, we conducted a questionnaire among 110 Dutch language teachers from secondary education and analyzed contemporary school textbooks likely to reflect existing teachers’ beliefs. Results indicate that teachers generally appear to favor stimulating reflective judgement in grammar teaching, although implementing activities aimed at fostering reflective thinking seems to be difficult for two reasons: (1) existing textbooks fail to implement sufficient concepts from modern linguistics, nor do they stimulate reflective thinking; (2) teachers lack sufficient conceptual knowledge from linguistics necessary to adequately address reflective thinking.
After the integration of research activities, universities of applied sciences (UASs) have formulated organisational strategies to foster connections between research and education (Daas et al., 2023). Scholars stated that the behaviour of employees within UASs influences ‘the direction and tempo in which the proposed aims are reached or resisted in the wider organisation’ (Griffioen & De Jong, 2017, p. 454). Thus, employees within UASs, such as academics and lower-level managers, play a key role in establishing research-education connections (Jenkins & Healey, 2005; Van der Rijst, 2009). A recent study has shown that academics and lower-level managers connect research and education through three types of behaviours: by involving aspects of research in education, by involving aspects of education in research, and by involving aspects of research and education equally, with the first type mentioned most often (Daas & Griffioen, in review). Similar patterns are observed in previous studies highlighting how education benefits from research rather than vice versa (Taylor, 2007). However, the beliefs underpinning this behavioural focus still remain unclear. Scholars have reported factors that could influence employees in connecting research and education, such as career stages, personal abilities and the availability of resources influencing how academics combine research and teaching tasks (Coate, Barnett & Williams, 2001; Shin, 2011), and research productivity and teaching beliefs influencing how academics integrate research in teaching (Hu et al., 2015; Magi & Beerkens, 2016). Despite the important value of these insights, these studies all focus on one (set of) behaviour(s) in connecting research and education instead of considering factors influencing behaviours in connecting research and education holistically. Moreover, most of these studies consider academics instead of managers. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to investigate the beliefs underpinning the behaviour of academics and lower-level managers in UASs in connecting research and education.To study the underpinning beliefs we applied the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB; Ajzen, 1991) as a theoretical lens. According to the TPB, a person’s behavioural intentions are shaped through three determinants (Ajzen, 1991). Behavioural beliefs (1) refer to a person’s conceptions about the expected positive/negative outcomes of practicing the behaviour. Normative beliefs (2) consist of a person’s conceptions about whether others approve/disapprove of practicing the behaviour. Control beliefs (3) are a person's conceptions about the presumed factors that could enable/hinder in practicing the behaviour. The research question is: Which behavioural, normative and control beliefs underpin the behaviour of academics and lower-level managers in connecting research and education?