Cargando…

Evaluating the validity of a functional electrical stimulation clinical decision making tool: A qualitative study

INTRODUCTION: Following central nervous system damage, the recovery of motor function is a priority. For some neurological populations, functional electrical stimulation (FES) is recommended in best practice guidelines for neurorehabilitation. However, limited resources exist to guide FES applicatio...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Abouzakhm, Nathalie, Choy, Samantha, Feld, Rebecca, Taylor, Chris, Carter, Kathryn, Degroot, Spencer, Musselman, Kristin E.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9707702/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36457863
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2022.1001123
_version_ 1784840757772812288
author Abouzakhm, Nathalie
Choy, Samantha
Feld, Rebecca
Taylor, Chris
Carter, Kathryn
Degroot, Spencer
Musselman, Kristin E.
author_facet Abouzakhm, Nathalie
Choy, Samantha
Feld, Rebecca
Taylor, Chris
Carter, Kathryn
Degroot, Spencer
Musselman, Kristin E.
author_sort Abouzakhm, Nathalie
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Following central nervous system damage, the recovery of motor function is a priority. For some neurological populations, functional electrical stimulation (FES) is recommended in best practice guidelines for neurorehabilitation. However, limited resources exist to guide FES application, despite clinicians reporting that a lack of FES knowledge prevents use in clinical practice. The FES Clinical Decision Making Tool was developed to assist clinicians with FES application and translation into clinical practice. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the content validity of the Tool from the perspectives of Canadian physical and occupational therapists using FES in neurorehabilitation. METHODS: Thirteen participants (twelve women, one man), aged 40.5 ± 10.3 years, participated in individual semi-structured interviews to explore their clinical decision making experiences when applying FES and to evaluate the content validity (i.e., appropriateness, comprehensibility, and comprehensiveness) of the Tool. Interviews were analyzed using a qualitative conventional content analysis following the DEPICT model. RESULTS: Three themes were identified. 1) Clinician context influences FES usage. Participants' experiences with FES use varied and application was influenced by treatment goals. 2) Parameter selection in clinical practice. Participants identified decision-making strategies and the challenges of parameter selection. 3) With modifications, the Tool is a valid resource to inform FES applications. Participants discussed its strengths, limitations, and suggested changes. While the Tool is useful, a more extensive resource (e.g., appendix) for the Tool is warranted. DISCUSSION: A revised Tool was created to improve its comprehensiveness and comprehensibility. Thus, the Tool is a valid resource for applying FES in neurorehabilitation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9707702
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-97077022022-11-30 Evaluating the validity of a functional electrical stimulation clinical decision making tool: A qualitative study Abouzakhm, Nathalie Choy, Samantha Feld, Rebecca Taylor, Chris Carter, Kathryn Degroot, Spencer Musselman, Kristin E. Front Neurol Neurology INTRODUCTION: Following central nervous system damage, the recovery of motor function is a priority. For some neurological populations, functional electrical stimulation (FES) is recommended in best practice guidelines for neurorehabilitation. However, limited resources exist to guide FES application, despite clinicians reporting that a lack of FES knowledge prevents use in clinical practice. The FES Clinical Decision Making Tool was developed to assist clinicians with FES application and translation into clinical practice. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the content validity of the Tool from the perspectives of Canadian physical and occupational therapists using FES in neurorehabilitation. METHODS: Thirteen participants (twelve women, one man), aged 40.5 ± 10.3 years, participated in individual semi-structured interviews to explore their clinical decision making experiences when applying FES and to evaluate the content validity (i.e., appropriateness, comprehensibility, and comprehensiveness) of the Tool. Interviews were analyzed using a qualitative conventional content analysis following the DEPICT model. RESULTS: Three themes were identified. 1) Clinician context influences FES usage. Participants' experiences with FES use varied and application was influenced by treatment goals. 2) Parameter selection in clinical practice. Participants identified decision-making strategies and the challenges of parameter selection. 3) With modifications, the Tool is a valid resource to inform FES applications. Participants discussed its strengths, limitations, and suggested changes. While the Tool is useful, a more extensive resource (e.g., appendix) for the Tool is warranted. DISCUSSION: A revised Tool was created to improve its comprehensiveness and comprehensibility. Thus, the Tool is a valid resource for applying FES in neurorehabilitation. Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-11-15 /pmc/articles/PMC9707702/ /pubmed/36457863 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2022.1001123 Text en Copyright © 2022 Abouzakhm, Choy, Feld, Taylor, Carter, Degroot and Musselman. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Neurology
Abouzakhm, Nathalie
Choy, Samantha
Feld, Rebecca
Taylor, Chris
Carter, Kathryn
Degroot, Spencer
Musselman, Kristin E.
Evaluating the validity of a functional electrical stimulation clinical decision making tool: A qualitative study
title Evaluating the validity of a functional electrical stimulation clinical decision making tool: A qualitative study
title_full Evaluating the validity of a functional electrical stimulation clinical decision making tool: A qualitative study
title_fullStr Evaluating the validity of a functional electrical stimulation clinical decision making tool: A qualitative study
title_full_unstemmed Evaluating the validity of a functional electrical stimulation clinical decision making tool: A qualitative study
title_short Evaluating the validity of a functional electrical stimulation clinical decision making tool: A qualitative study
title_sort evaluating the validity of a functional electrical stimulation clinical decision making tool: a qualitative study
topic Neurology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9707702/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36457863
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2022.1001123
work_keys_str_mv AT abouzakhmnathalie evaluatingthevalidityofafunctionalelectricalstimulationclinicaldecisionmakingtoolaqualitativestudy
AT choysamantha evaluatingthevalidityofafunctionalelectricalstimulationclinicaldecisionmakingtoolaqualitativestudy
AT feldrebecca evaluatingthevalidityofafunctionalelectricalstimulationclinicaldecisionmakingtoolaqualitativestudy
AT taylorchris evaluatingthevalidityofafunctionalelectricalstimulationclinicaldecisionmakingtoolaqualitativestudy
AT carterkathryn evaluatingthevalidityofafunctionalelectricalstimulationclinicaldecisionmakingtoolaqualitativestudy
AT degrootspencer evaluatingthevalidityofafunctionalelectricalstimulationclinicaldecisionmakingtoolaqualitativestudy
AT musselmankristine evaluatingthevalidityofafunctionalelectricalstimulationclinicaldecisionmakingtoolaqualitativestudy