A S Pollock1, L Legg, P Langhorne, C Sellars. 1. Stroke Therapy Evaluation Programme, Academic Section of Geriatric Medicine, Glasgow Royal Infirmary, Scotland. pollock@middleton4.freeserve.co.uk
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the perceived barriers to evidence-based practice by health professionals working within the field of stroke rehabilitation. DESIGN: Focus groups were carried out to identify the perceived barriers; these were followed by a postal questionnaire that asked stroke rehabilitation professionals to rate their agreement with the perceived barriers. SUBJECTS: One hundred and five stroke rehabilitation professionals participated in the focus groups and were sent the postal questionnaire. Eighty-six responses were returned, from 27 physiotherapists, 26 occupational therapists, 22 nurses, 6 speech and language therapists, and 5 other professionals. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Proportion of subjects rating their level of agreement with statements as 1 'agree', 2, 3, 4 or 5 'disagree'. Scores of 1 or 2 were classified as 'agreement', and scores of 4 or 5 were classified as 'disagreement': the percentages of subjects agreeing or disagreeing with each statement were calculated. RESULTS: Twenty barriers were identified, classified under the headings 'ability', 'opportunity' and 'implementation'. Seventy-nine (92%) of all respondents agreed that keeping up to date with research findings was important to them, but only 7 (8%) were happy with the time that they had to do this. Fifty-eight (67%) perceived a need for further training. Only 4 (5%) agreed that it was easy to transfer research findings into their daily practice. A number of significant differences were found between the perceived barriers of different disciplines.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the perceived barriers to evidence-based practice by health professionals working within the field of stroke rehabilitation. DESIGN: Focus groups were carried out to identify the perceived barriers; these were followed by a postal questionnaire that asked stroke rehabilitation professionals to rate their agreement with the perceived barriers. SUBJECTS: One hundred and five stroke rehabilitation professionals participated in the focus groups and were sent the postal questionnaire. Eighty-six responses were returned, from 27 physiotherapists, 26 occupational therapists, 22 nurses, 6 speech and language therapists, and 5 other professionals. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Proportion of subjects rating their level of agreement with statements as 1 'agree', 2, 3, 4 or 5 'disagree'. Scores of 1 or 2 were classified as 'agreement', and scores of 4 or 5 were classified as 'disagreement': the percentages of subjects agreeing or disagreeing with each statement were calculated. RESULTS: Twenty barriers were identified, classified under the headings 'ability', 'opportunity' and 'implementation'. Seventy-nine (92%) of all respondents agreed that keeping up to date with research findings was important to them, but only 7 (8%) were happy with the time that they had to do this. Fifty-eight (67%) perceived a need for further training. Only 4 (5%) agreed that it was easy to transfer research findings into their daily practice. A number of significant differences were found between the perceived barriers of different disciplines.