Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading  Processing Request

Why the uptake of eRehabilitation programs in stroke care is so difficult-a focus group study in the Netherlands.

Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading   Processing Request
اقرأ على الانترنت اقرأ أكثر حفظ في قائمتي
  • معلومة اضافية
    • المصدر:
      Publisher: BioMed Central Country of Publication: England NLM ID: 101258411 Publication Model: Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1748-5908 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 17485908 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Implement Sci Subsets: MEDLINE
    • بيانات النشر:
      Original Publication: [London] : BioMed Central, 2006-
    • الموضوع:
      Attitude of Health Personnel*; Patient Acceptance of Health Care/*psychology ; Stroke Rehabilitation/*methods ; Telerehabilitation/*methods; Adult ; Aged ; Caregivers/psychology ; Cost-Benefit Analysis ; Female ; Focus Groups ; Health Personnel/psychology ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Netherlands ; Patients/psychology ; Politics ; Program Evaluation ; Qualitative Research ; Time Factors
    • نبذة مختصرة :
      Background: The uptake of eRehabilitation programs in stroke care is insufficient, despite the growing availability. The aim of this study was to explore which factors influence the uptake of eRehabilitation in stroke rehabilitation, among stroke patients, informal caregivers, and healthcare professionals.
      Methods: A qualitative focus group study with eight focus groups (6-8 participants per group) was conducted: six with stroke patients/informal caregivers and two with healthcare professionals involved in stroke rehabilitation (rehabilitation physicians, physical therapists, occupational therapists, psychologists, managers). Focus group interviews were audiotaped, transcribed in full, and analyzed by direct content analysis using the implementation model of Grol.
      Results: Thirty-two patients, 15 informal caregivers, and 13 healthcare professionals were included. A total of 14 influencing factors were found, grouped to 5 of the 6 levels of the implementation model of Grol (Innovation, Organizational context, Individual patient, Individual professional, and Economic and political context). Most quotes of patients, informal caregivers, and healthcare professionals were classified to factors at the level of the Innovation (e.g., content, attractiveness, and feasibility of eRehabilitation programs). In addition, for patients, relatively many quotes were classified to factors at the level of the individual patient (e.g., patients characteristics as fatigue and the inability to understand ICT-devices), and for healthcare professionals at the level of the organizational context (e.g., having sufficient time and the fit with existing processes of care).
      Conclusion: Although there was a considerable overlap in reported factors between patients/informal caregivers and healthcare professionals when it concerns eRehabilitation as innovation, its seems that patients/informal caregivers give more emphasis to factors related to the individual patient, whereas healthcare professionals emphasize the importance of factors related to the organizational context. This difference should be considered when developing an implementation strategy for patients and healthcare professionals separately.
    • References:
      Lancet. 2011 May 14;377(9778):1693-702. (PMID: 21571152)
      Med J Aust. 2004 Mar 15;180(S6):S57-60. (PMID: 15012583)
      Top Stroke Rehabil. 2007 Mar-Apr;14(2):32-42. (PMID: 17517572)
      Lancet. 2008 May 10;371(9624):1612-23. (PMID: 18468545)
      Int J Rehabil Res. 2013 Jun;36(2):162-71. (PMID: 23337324)
      J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2012 Aug 02;9:52. (PMID: 22856548)
      PLoS One. 2018 Jan 23;13(1):e0191566. (PMID: 29360872)
      Circulation. 2017 Feb 14;135(7):e24-e44. (PMID: 27998940)
      Int J Qual Health Care. 2007 Dec;19(6):349-57. (PMID: 17872937)
      Eur J Neurol. 2006 Jun;13(6):581-98. (PMID: 16796582)
      Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Sep 11;(9):CD000197. (PMID: 24026639)
      Stud Health Technol Inform. 2016;228:589-93. (PMID: 27577452)
      Physiother Theory Pract. 2015 Mar;31(3):160-5. (PMID: 25404160)
      Int J Qual Health Care. 2004 Apr;16(2):107-23. (PMID: 15051705)
      Aust J Physiother. 2009;55(1):5-6. (PMID: 19226236)
      J Rehabil Med. 2004 Jul;(44 Suppl):135-41. (PMID: 15370761)
      Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Dec 16;(12):CD010255. (PMID: 24338496)
      Psychol Health. 2010 Dec;25(10):1229-45. (PMID: 20204937)
      Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2018 Dec;99(12):2472-2477.e2. (PMID: 29902469)
      Qual Health Res. 2005 Nov;15(9):1277-88. (PMID: 16204405)
      Stroke. 2017 Aug;48(8):2329-2334. (PMID: 28679855)
      Telemed J E Health. 2017 May;23(5):421-429. (PMID: 27705095)
      J Eval Clin Pract. 2008 Oct;14(5):888-97. (PMID: 19018923)
      Disabil Rehabil. 2015;37(5):447-55. (PMID: 24901351)
      Implement Sci. 2009 Aug 07;4:50. (PMID: 19664226)
      Lancet Neurol. 2016 Aug;15(9):913-924. (PMID: 27291521)
      JAMA. 1999 Oct 20;282(15):1458-65. (PMID: 10535437)
      Disabil Rehabil. 2012;34(2):167-73. (PMID: 21936712)
      Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2019 May;14(4):317-324. (PMID: 29529895)
      J Telemed Telecare. 2011;17(1):1-6. (PMID: 21097560)
      Annu Rev Biomed Eng. 2002;4:287-320. (PMID: 12117760)
      Bull World Health Organ. 2012 May 1;90(5):323-323A. (PMID: 22589561)
      Disabil Rehabil. 2015;37(13):1186-92. (PMID: 25212736)
      Int J Med Inform. 2007 Jun;76 Suppl 1:S212-21. (PMID: 16828335)
    • Contributed Indexing:
      Keywords: Barriers and facilitators; Focus groups; Implementation; Rehabilitation; Stroke; eHealth; eRehabilitation
    • الموضوع:
      Date Created: 20181031 Date Completed: 20190422 Latest Revision: 20231004
    • الموضوع:
      20231215
    • الرقم المعرف:
      PMC6206819
    • الرقم المعرف:
      10.1186/s13012-018-0827-5
    • الرقم المعرف:
      30373611