Cargando…
A day in the life: a qualitative study of clinical decision-making and uptake of neurorehabilitation technology
BACKGROUND: Neurorehabilitation engineering faces numerous challenges to translating new technologies, but it is unclear which of these challenges are most limiting. Our aim is to improve understanding of rehabilitation therapists’ real-time decision-making processes on the use of rehabilitation tec...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8317366/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34321036 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12984-021-00911-6 |
_version_ | 1783730056499036160 |
---|---|
author | Celian, Courtney Swanson, Veronica Shah, Maahi Newman, Caitlin Fowler-King, Bridget Gallik, Sarah Reilly, Kaitlin Reinkensmeyer, David J. Patton, James Rafferty, Miriam R. |
author_facet | Celian, Courtney Swanson, Veronica Shah, Maahi Newman, Caitlin Fowler-King, Bridget Gallik, Sarah Reilly, Kaitlin Reinkensmeyer, David J. Patton, James Rafferty, Miriam R. |
author_sort | Celian, Courtney |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Neurorehabilitation engineering faces numerous challenges to translating new technologies, but it is unclear which of these challenges are most limiting. Our aim is to improve understanding of rehabilitation therapists’ real-time decision-making processes on the use of rehabilitation technology (RT) in clinical treatment. METHODS: We used a phenomenological qualitative approach, in which three OTs and two PTs employed at a major, technology-encouraging rehabilitation hospital wrote vignettes from a written prompt describing their RT use decisions during treatment sessions with nine patients (4 with stroke, 2 traumatic brain injury, 1 spinal cord injury, 1 with multiple sclerosis). We then coded the vignettes using deductive qualitative analysis from 17 constructs derived from the RT literature and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Data were synthesized using summative content analysis. RESULTS: Of the constructs recorded, the five most prominent are from CFIR determinants of: (i) relative advantage, (ii) personal attributes of the patients, (iii) clinician knowledge and beliefs of the device/intervention, (iv) complexity of the devices including time and setup, and (v) organizational readiness to implement. Therapists characterized candidate RT as having a relative disadvantage compared to conventional treatment due to lack of relevance to functional training. RT design also often failed to consider the multi-faceted personal attributes of the patients, including diagnoses, goals, and physical and cognitive limitations. Clinicians’ comfort with RT was increased by their previous training but was decreased by the perceived complexity of RT. Finally, therapists have limited time to gather, setup, and use RT. CONCLUSIONS: Despite decades of design work aimed at creating clinically useful RT, many lack compatibility with clinical translation needs in inpatient neurologic rehabilitation. New RT continue to impede the immediacy, versatility, and functionality of hands-on therapy mediated treatment with simple everyday objects. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8317366 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-83173662021-07-28 A day in the life: a qualitative study of clinical decision-making and uptake of neurorehabilitation technology Celian, Courtney Swanson, Veronica Shah, Maahi Newman, Caitlin Fowler-King, Bridget Gallik, Sarah Reilly, Kaitlin Reinkensmeyer, David J. Patton, James Rafferty, Miriam R. J Neuroeng Rehabil Research BACKGROUND: Neurorehabilitation engineering faces numerous challenges to translating new technologies, but it is unclear which of these challenges are most limiting. Our aim is to improve understanding of rehabilitation therapists’ real-time decision-making processes on the use of rehabilitation technology (RT) in clinical treatment. METHODS: We used a phenomenological qualitative approach, in which three OTs and two PTs employed at a major, technology-encouraging rehabilitation hospital wrote vignettes from a written prompt describing their RT use decisions during treatment sessions with nine patients (4 with stroke, 2 traumatic brain injury, 1 spinal cord injury, 1 with multiple sclerosis). We then coded the vignettes using deductive qualitative analysis from 17 constructs derived from the RT literature and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Data were synthesized using summative content analysis. RESULTS: Of the constructs recorded, the five most prominent are from CFIR determinants of: (i) relative advantage, (ii) personal attributes of the patients, (iii) clinician knowledge and beliefs of the device/intervention, (iv) complexity of the devices including time and setup, and (v) organizational readiness to implement. Therapists characterized candidate RT as having a relative disadvantage compared to conventional treatment due to lack of relevance to functional training. RT design also often failed to consider the multi-faceted personal attributes of the patients, including diagnoses, goals, and physical and cognitive limitations. Clinicians’ comfort with RT was increased by their previous training but was decreased by the perceived complexity of RT. Finally, therapists have limited time to gather, setup, and use RT. CONCLUSIONS: Despite decades of design work aimed at creating clinically useful RT, many lack compatibility with clinical translation needs in inpatient neurologic rehabilitation. New RT continue to impede the immediacy, versatility, and functionality of hands-on therapy mediated treatment with simple everyday objects. BioMed Central 2021-07-28 /pmc/articles/PMC8317366/ /pubmed/34321036 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12984-021-00911-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Celian, Courtney Swanson, Veronica Shah, Maahi Newman, Caitlin Fowler-King, Bridget Gallik, Sarah Reilly, Kaitlin Reinkensmeyer, David J. Patton, James Rafferty, Miriam R. A day in the life: a qualitative study of clinical decision-making and uptake of neurorehabilitation technology |
title | A day in the life: a qualitative study of clinical decision-making and uptake of neurorehabilitation technology |
title_full | A day in the life: a qualitative study of clinical decision-making and uptake of neurorehabilitation technology |
title_fullStr | A day in the life: a qualitative study of clinical decision-making and uptake of neurorehabilitation technology |
title_full_unstemmed | A day in the life: a qualitative study of clinical decision-making and uptake of neurorehabilitation technology |
title_short | A day in the life: a qualitative study of clinical decision-making and uptake of neurorehabilitation technology |
title_sort | day in the life: a qualitative study of clinical decision-making and uptake of neurorehabilitation technology |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8317366/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34321036 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12984-021-00911-6 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT celiancourtney adayinthelifeaqualitativestudyofclinicaldecisionmakinganduptakeofneurorehabilitationtechnology AT swansonveronica adayinthelifeaqualitativestudyofclinicaldecisionmakinganduptakeofneurorehabilitationtechnology AT shahmaahi adayinthelifeaqualitativestudyofclinicaldecisionmakinganduptakeofneurorehabilitationtechnology AT newmancaitlin adayinthelifeaqualitativestudyofclinicaldecisionmakinganduptakeofneurorehabilitationtechnology AT fowlerkingbridget adayinthelifeaqualitativestudyofclinicaldecisionmakinganduptakeofneurorehabilitationtechnology AT galliksarah adayinthelifeaqualitativestudyofclinicaldecisionmakinganduptakeofneurorehabilitationtechnology AT reillykaitlin adayinthelifeaqualitativestudyofclinicaldecisionmakinganduptakeofneurorehabilitationtechnology AT reinkensmeyerdavidj adayinthelifeaqualitativestudyofclinicaldecisionmakinganduptakeofneurorehabilitationtechnology AT pattonjames adayinthelifeaqualitativestudyofclinicaldecisionmakinganduptakeofneurorehabilitationtechnology AT raffertymiriamr adayinthelifeaqualitativestudyofclinicaldecisionmakinganduptakeofneurorehabilitationtechnology AT celiancourtney dayinthelifeaqualitativestudyofclinicaldecisionmakinganduptakeofneurorehabilitationtechnology AT swansonveronica dayinthelifeaqualitativestudyofclinicaldecisionmakinganduptakeofneurorehabilitationtechnology AT shahmaahi dayinthelifeaqualitativestudyofclinicaldecisionmakinganduptakeofneurorehabilitationtechnology AT newmancaitlin dayinthelifeaqualitativestudyofclinicaldecisionmakinganduptakeofneurorehabilitationtechnology AT fowlerkingbridget dayinthelifeaqualitativestudyofclinicaldecisionmakinganduptakeofneurorehabilitationtechnology AT galliksarah dayinthelifeaqualitativestudyofclinicaldecisionmakinganduptakeofneurorehabilitationtechnology AT reillykaitlin dayinthelifeaqualitativestudyofclinicaldecisionmakinganduptakeofneurorehabilitationtechnology AT reinkensmeyerdavidj dayinthelifeaqualitativestudyofclinicaldecisionmakinganduptakeofneurorehabilitationtechnology AT pattonjames dayinthelifeaqualitativestudyofclinicaldecisionmakinganduptakeofneurorehabilitationtechnology AT raffertymiriamr dayinthelifeaqualitativestudyofclinicaldecisionmakinganduptakeofneurorehabilitationtechnology |