PUBLISHED RESEARCH IN PEDIATRIC PHYSICAL THERAPY: AN ANALYSIS OF TRENDS FROM FIRST ISSUE TO PRESENT. Lana R. Svien; Sonya L. Anderson* Physical Therapy, University of South Dakota, Vermillion, SD PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine if the number of experimental articles has increased in Pediatric Physical Therapy (PPT) journal, along with determining the type of research design and level of research of all of the articles published within the first fifteen years of the journal's existence. BACKGROUNDS/SIGNIFICANCE: In the 21st century, evidenced-based practice has become a major force in physical therapy practice. Moreover, the APTA Hooked on Evidence Website represents an effort to develop a database containing current research evidence on the effectiveness of physical therapy interventions. Since the inception of PPT in 1989, only the journal articles from 1991-1992 have been systematically reviewed.(Harris) SUBJECTS: All PPT journal articles (n=262) from Spring 1989 to Winter 2003 (Volumes 1-15) were reviewed. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The primary and secondary author systematically reviewed all articles in each PPT issue. Editorials, section information, reports from meetings, and department reports were not included. The type of research design, level of research, and statistical analyses were determined for the experimental and nonexperimental articles (n=168). To determine the type of research design utilized by the articles, the authors used the definition of experimental and non-experimental research established by Portney and Watkins. To determine the level of research, Sackett's level of research definitions were utilized. ANALYSES: The data were divided into the following three groups: Volumes 1-5, Volumes 6-10, and Volumes 11-15. Each volume included 4 journals; thus, each 5-year period evaluated 20 journals. Descriptive statistics were performed on the data. A one-way ANOVA test was performed (α =.05) among the 3 groups to determine if there was a statistically significant difference among the 3 groups. RESULTS: Percentage of agreement obtained for the type of research design and level of research for the total number of articles was 100%. Over the 15-year period, 32 articles (12%) met the definition of experimental and 136 articles (52%) met the definition of non-experimental. Of the experimental articles, 4 were classified as randomized clinical trials, 11 as single case design, and 17 as quasi experimental designs. Of the non-experimental articles, 35 articles were classified as methodological, 7 as historical, 5 as evaluative, and 89 as descriptive. For further classification of the descriptive articles, 29 were classified as survey, 7 as qualitative, 8 as case reports, 14 as cross-sectional, 8 as longitudinal, 11 as normative, 10 as correlational, and 2 as descriptive correlational. Based on the Sackett definitions, 26 out of the 32 experimental articles were categorized as Level V/C, 2 out of the 32 articles categorized as Level III/C, and 4 out of the 32 articles categorized as Level II/B. No articles in PPT were categorized as Level I/A research, which are large randomized clinical trials with a control group. The proportion of experimental articles to the total number of articles remained at 9.3% (7 experimental articles/75 total articles) for both the first and second 5-year periods (9 experimental articles/97 total articles). The proportion increased to 17.8% in the last 5- year period (16 experimental articles/90 total articles). Although these data show an increase in experimental articles compared to the total number of articles, a one-way ANOVA (a =.05) showed no significant differences among the 3 groups (p =.12). CONCLUSIONS: Only thirty-two articles, 12% of the total articles, met the definition of experimental research in the 15-year period of the existence of PPT. Although the rate of experimental articles improved with each 5-year period, there were no statistically significant differences among the three 5-year periods. It is important that the number of experimental articles increase to meet the demands of evidence-based practice. In addition to experimental pediatric clinical research, clinicians can contribute to evidence based practice by evaluating research articles published in Pediatric Physical Therapy, and other pediatric journals, and submit to the Hooked on Evidence web page on the APTA website. 1. Harris, Susan and Ana Leticia Mulero Portela. Research in pediatric physical therapy: past, present, and future. Ped Phy Ther. 1994; 6(3):133-138. 2. Portney, Leslie and Mary Watkins. Foundations of Clinical Research: Applications to Practice. Norwalk, Connecticut:Appleton and Lange;1999. 3. Sackett, DL. "Rules of evidence and clinical recommendations on the use of antithrombic agents." Chest. 1989; 95 (2 Suppl): 25-45. FUNDING SOURCE: None. KEYWORDS: research, pediatric physical therapy, evidence-based medicine Copyright 2009 by the American Physical Therapy Association. Requests for reprints should be directed to the corresponding author of the article. Educators, students, and other academic customers may receive permission to reprint copyrighted material from Physical Therapy (ISSN 1538-6724) by contacting the Copyright Clearance Center Inc, 222 Rosewood Dr, Danvers, MA 01923. Other types of customers who want permission to reprint should contact the APTA Editorial Office, Attn: Physical Therapy.