Cargando…

Telerehabilitation for physical disabilities and movement impairment: A service evaluation in South West England

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: Telerehabilitation was used to ensure continued provision of care during the COVID‐19 pandemic, but there was a lack of guidance on how to use it safely and effectively for people with physical disabilities and movement impairment. In this service evaluation, we aimed...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Buckingham, Sarah A., Sein, Kim, Anil, Krithika, Demain, Sara, Gunn, Hilary, Jones, Ray B., Kent, Bridie, Logan, Angela, Marsden, Jonathan, Playford, E D., Freeman, Jenny
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9790516/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35437833
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jep.13689
_version_ 1784859194500841472
author Buckingham, Sarah A.
Sein, Kim
Anil, Krithika
Demain, Sara
Gunn, Hilary
Jones, Ray B.
Kent, Bridie
Logan, Angela
Marsden, Jonathan
Playford, E D.
Freeman, Jenny
author_facet Buckingham, Sarah A.
Sein, Kim
Anil, Krithika
Demain, Sara
Gunn, Hilary
Jones, Ray B.
Kent, Bridie
Logan, Angela
Marsden, Jonathan
Playford, E D.
Freeman, Jenny
author_sort Buckingham, Sarah A.
collection PubMed
description RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: Telerehabilitation was used to ensure continued provision of care during the COVID‐19 pandemic, but there was a lack of guidance on how to use it safely and effectively for people with physical disabilities and movement impairment. In this service evaluation, we aimed to collate information on practitioner and patient experiences, challenges and facilitators, and examples of best practice to inform the development of an online toolkit and training package. METHODS: Guided discussions were carried out with 44 practitioners, 7 patients and 2 carers from five health and social care organisations in South West England, and analysed thematically. RESULTS: Practitioners and patients had positive experiences of telerehabilitation and were optimistic about its future use. Recognized benefits for people with physical disabilities included greater flexibility, reduced travel and fatigue, having appointments in a familiar environment and ease of involving family members. Challenges encountered were: technological (usability issues, access to technology and digital skills); difficulties seeing or hearing patients; the lack of ‘hands‐on’ care; and safety concerns. Facilitators were supported by colleagues or digital champions, and family members or carers who could assist patients during their appointments. Key themes in best practice were: person‐centred and tailored care; clear and open communication and observation and preparation and planning. Practitioners shared tips for remote physical assessments; for example, making use of patient‐reported outcomes, and asking patients to wear bright and contrasting coloured clothing to make it easier to see movement. CONCLUSION: Telerehabilitation holds promise in health and social care, but it is necessary to share good practice to ensure it is safe, effective and accessible. We collated information and recommendations that informed the content of the Telerehab Toolkit (https://www.plymouth.ac.uk/research/telerehab), a practical resource for practitioners, patients and carers, with a focus on remote assessment and management of physical disabilities and movement impairment.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9790516
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-97905162022-12-28 Telerehabilitation for physical disabilities and movement impairment: A service evaluation in South West England Buckingham, Sarah A. Sein, Kim Anil, Krithika Demain, Sara Gunn, Hilary Jones, Ray B. Kent, Bridie Logan, Angela Marsden, Jonathan Playford, E D. Freeman, Jenny J Eval Clin Pract Original Papers RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: Telerehabilitation was used to ensure continued provision of care during the COVID‐19 pandemic, but there was a lack of guidance on how to use it safely and effectively for people with physical disabilities and movement impairment. In this service evaluation, we aimed to collate information on practitioner and patient experiences, challenges and facilitators, and examples of best practice to inform the development of an online toolkit and training package. METHODS: Guided discussions were carried out with 44 practitioners, 7 patients and 2 carers from five health and social care organisations in South West England, and analysed thematically. RESULTS: Practitioners and patients had positive experiences of telerehabilitation and were optimistic about its future use. Recognized benefits for people with physical disabilities included greater flexibility, reduced travel and fatigue, having appointments in a familiar environment and ease of involving family members. Challenges encountered were: technological (usability issues, access to technology and digital skills); difficulties seeing or hearing patients; the lack of ‘hands‐on’ care; and safety concerns. Facilitators were supported by colleagues or digital champions, and family members or carers who could assist patients during their appointments. Key themes in best practice were: person‐centred and tailored care; clear and open communication and observation and preparation and planning. Practitioners shared tips for remote physical assessments; for example, making use of patient‐reported outcomes, and asking patients to wear bright and contrasting coloured clothing to make it easier to see movement. CONCLUSION: Telerehabilitation holds promise in health and social care, but it is necessary to share good practice to ensure it is safe, effective and accessible. We collated information and recommendations that informed the content of the Telerehab Toolkit (https://www.plymouth.ac.uk/research/telerehab), a practical resource for practitioners, patients and carers, with a focus on remote assessment and management of physical disabilities and movement impairment. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-04-19 2022-12 /pmc/articles/PMC9790516/ /pubmed/35437833 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jep.13689 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Papers
Buckingham, Sarah A.
Sein, Kim
Anil, Krithika
Demain, Sara
Gunn, Hilary
Jones, Ray B.
Kent, Bridie
Logan, Angela
Marsden, Jonathan
Playford, E D.
Freeman, Jenny
Telerehabilitation for physical disabilities and movement impairment: A service evaluation in South West England
title Telerehabilitation for physical disabilities and movement impairment: A service evaluation in South West England
title_full Telerehabilitation for physical disabilities and movement impairment: A service evaluation in South West England
title_fullStr Telerehabilitation for physical disabilities and movement impairment: A service evaluation in South West England
title_full_unstemmed Telerehabilitation for physical disabilities and movement impairment: A service evaluation in South West England
title_short Telerehabilitation for physical disabilities and movement impairment: A service evaluation in South West England
title_sort telerehabilitation for physical disabilities and movement impairment: a service evaluation in south west england
topic Original Papers
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9790516/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35437833
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jep.13689
work_keys_str_mv AT buckinghamsaraha telerehabilitationforphysicaldisabilitiesandmovementimpairmentaserviceevaluationinsouthwestengland
AT seinkim telerehabilitationforphysicaldisabilitiesandmovementimpairmentaserviceevaluationinsouthwestengland
AT anilkrithika telerehabilitationforphysicaldisabilitiesandmovementimpairmentaserviceevaluationinsouthwestengland
AT demainsara telerehabilitationforphysicaldisabilitiesandmovementimpairmentaserviceevaluationinsouthwestengland
AT gunnhilary telerehabilitationforphysicaldisabilitiesandmovementimpairmentaserviceevaluationinsouthwestengland
AT jonesrayb telerehabilitationforphysicaldisabilitiesandmovementimpairmentaserviceevaluationinsouthwestengland
AT kentbridie telerehabilitationforphysicaldisabilitiesandmovementimpairmentaserviceevaluationinsouthwestengland
AT loganangela telerehabilitationforphysicaldisabilitiesandmovementimpairmentaserviceevaluationinsouthwestengland
AT marsdenjonathan telerehabilitationforphysicaldisabilitiesandmovementimpairmentaserviceevaluationinsouthwestengland
AT playforded telerehabilitationforphysicaldisabilitiesandmovementimpairmentaserviceevaluationinsouthwestengland
AT freemanjenny telerehabilitationforphysicaldisabilitiesandmovementimpairmentaserviceevaluationinsouthwestengland