Literature DB >> 24370322

Development of a theory-driven rehabilitation treatment taxonomy: conceptual issues.

John Whyte1, Marcel P Dijkers2, Tessa Hart3, Jeanne M Zanca2, Andrew Packel3, Mary Ferraro3, Theodore Tsaousides2.   

Abstract

Many rehabilitation treatment interventions, unlike pharmacologic treatments, are not operationally defined, and the labels given to such treatments do not specify the active ingredients that produce the intended treatment effects. This, in turn, limits the ability to study and disseminate treatments, to communicate about them clearly, or to train new clinicians to administer them appropriately. We sought to begin the development of a system of classification of rehabilitation treatments and services that is based on their active ingredients. To do this, we reviewed a range of published descriptions of rehabilitation treatments and treatments that were familiar to the authors from their clinical and research experience. These treatment examples were used to develop preliminary rules for defining discrete treatments, identifying the area of function they directly treat, and identifying their active ingredients. These preliminary rules were then tested against additional treatment examples, and problems in their application were used to revise the rules in an iterative fashion. The following concepts, which emerged from this process, are defined and discussed in relation with the development of a rehabilitation treatment taxonomy: rehabilitation treatment taxonomy; treatment and enablement theory; recipient (of treatment); essential, active, and inactive ingredients; mechanism of action; targets and aims of treatment; session; progression; dosing parameters; and social and physical environment. It is hoped that articulation of the conceptual issues encountered during this project will be useful to others attempting to promote theory-based discussion of rehabilitation effects and that multidisciplinary discussion and research will further refine these rules and definitions to advance rehabilitation treatment classification.
Copyright © 2014 American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Keywords:  Behavior and behavior mechanisms; Classification; Environment; ICF; International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health; Patient education as topic; RTT; Rehabilitation; Social environment; Therapeutics; rehabilitation treatment taxonomy

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24370322     DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2013.05.034

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil        ISSN: 0003-9993            Impact factor:   3.966


  14 in total

Review 1.  A taxonomy of voice therapy.

Authors:  Jarrad H Van Stan; Nelson Roy; Shaheen Awan; Joseph Stemple; Robert E Hillman
Journal:  Am J Speech Lang Pathol       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 2.408

2.  The Rehabilitation Treatment Specification System: Implications for Improvements in Research Design, Reporting, Replication, and Synthesis.

Authors:  Jarrad H Van Stan; Marcel P Dijkers; John Whyte; Tessa Hart; Lyn S Turkstra; Jeanne M Zanca; Christine Chen
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2018-09-27       Impact factor: 3.966

3.  Knowing What We're Doing: Why Specification of Treatment Methods Is Critical for Evidence-Based Practice in Speech-Language Pathology.

Authors:  Lyn S Turkstra; Rocío Norman; John Whyte; Marcel P Dijkers; Tessa Hart
Journal:  Am J Speech Lang Pathol       Date:  2016-05-01       Impact factor: 2.408

4.  Voice Therapy According to the Rehabilitation Treatment Specification System: Expert Consensus Ingredients and Targets.

Authors:  Jarrad H Van Stan; John Whyte; Joseph R Duffy; Julie Barkmeier-Kraemer; Patricia Doyle; Shirley Gherson; Lisa Kelchner; Jason Muise; Brian Petty; Nelson Roy; Joseph Stemple; Susan Thibeault; Carol Jorgensen Tolejano
Journal:  Am J Speech Lang Pathol       Date:  2021-08-31       Impact factor: 2.408

5.  Functional Test of the Hemiparetic Upper Extremity: A Rasch Analysis With Theoretical Implications.

Authors:  Veronica T Rowe; Carolee J Winstein; Steven L Wolf; Michelle L Woodbury
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2017-04-21       Impact factor: 3.966

6.  Introducing IJTMB's Trigger Points: Topical Dialogue amongst Therapeutic Massage & Bodywork Practitioners and Educators.

Authors:  Whitney Lowe; Niki Munk; Antony Porcino
Journal:  Int J Ther Massage Bodywork       Date:  2014-06-04

7.  Identifying mechanisms of change in a conversation therapy for aphasia using behaviour change theory and qualitative methods.

Authors:  Fiona M Johnson; Wendy Best; Firle Christina Beckley; Jane Maxim; Suzanne Beeke
Journal:  Int J Lang Commun Disord       Date:  2016-11-23       Impact factor: 3.020

8.  We12BFit!-Improving lifestyle physical activity in children aged 7-12 years with developmental coordination disorder: protocol of a multicentre single-arm mixed-method study.

Authors:  Petra Braaksma; Ilse Stuive; Hinke Boomsma; Corry K van der Sluis; Marina M Schoemaker; Rienk Dekker
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2018-06-27       Impact factor: 2.692

Review 9.  Tracking the evolution of virtual reality applications to rehabilitation as a field of study.

Authors:  Emily A Keshner; Patrice Tamar Weiss; Dorit Geifman; Daphne Raban
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2019-06-21       Impact factor: 4.262

Review 10.  Cognition in multiple sclerosis: State of the field and priorities for the future.

Authors:  James F Sumowski; Ralph Benedict; Christian Enzinger; Massimo Filippi; Jeroen J Geurts; Paivi Hamalainen; Hanneke Hulst; Matilde Inglese; Victoria M Leavitt; Maria A Rocca; Eija M Rosti-Otajarvi; Stephen Rao
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  2018-01-17       Impact factor: 9.910

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.