BACKGROUND: Only a small percentage of research is ever successfully translated into practice. The Graded Repetitive Arm Supplementary Program (GRASP) is a stroke rehabilitation intervention that anecdotally has had rapid translation from research to clinical practice. This study was conducted to explore the characteristics of this practice implementation. OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were: (1) to explore the extent of practice implementation of GRASP in the United Kingdom; (2) using an implementation framework, to explore UK therapists' opinions of implementing GRASP; and (3) if GRASP is found to be used in the United Kingdom, to investigate differences in opinions between therapists who are using GRASP in practice and those who are not. DESIGN: A cross-sectional study design was used. METHODS: Data were collected via an online questionnaire. Participants in this study were members of the College of Occupational Therapy Specialist Section Neurological Practice and the Association of Chartered Physiotherapists Interested in Neurology. RESULTS: Of the 274 therapists who responded to the survey, 61 (22.3%) had experience of using GRASP, 114 (41.6%) knew of GRASP but had never used it, and 99 (36.1%) had never heard of GRASP. Therapists displayed positive opinions toward the implementation of a manual with graded progressions of structured upper limb exercises for people after stroke. Opinions were different between therapists who had used GRASP and those who had not. LIMITATIONS: The findings of this study may be limited by response bias. CONCLUSIONS: GRASP is a relatively new stroke rehabilitation intervention that has made impressive translation into the knowledge and practice of UK therapists. Therapists' opinions would suggest that GRASP is both an acceptable and feasible intervention and has the potential to be implemented by a greater number of therapists in a range of settings.
BACKGROUND: Only a small percentage of research is ever successfully translated into practice. The Graded Repetitive Arm Supplementary Program (GRASP) is a stroke rehabilitation intervention that anecdotally has had rapid translation from research to clinical practice. This study was conducted to explore the characteristics of this practice implementation. OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were: (1) to explore the extent of practice implementation of GRASP in the United Kingdom; (2) using an implementation framework, to explore UK therapists' opinions of implementing GRASP; and (3) if GRASP is found to be used in the United Kingdom, to investigate differences in opinions between therapists who are using GRASP in practice and those who are not. DESIGN: A cross-sectional study design was used. METHODS: Data were collected via an online questionnaire. Participants in this study were members of the College of Occupational Therapy Specialist Section Neurological Practice and the Association of Chartered Physiotherapists Interested in Neurology. RESULTS: Of the 274 therapists who responded to the survey, 61 (22.3%) had experience of using GRASP, 114 (41.6%) knew of GRASP but had never used it, and 99 (36.1%) had never heard of GRASP. Therapists displayed positive opinions toward the implementation of a manual with graded progressions of structured upper limb exercises for people after stroke. Opinions were different between therapists who had used GRASP and those who had not. LIMITATIONS: The findings of this study may be limited by response bias. CONCLUSIONS: GRASP is a relatively new stroke rehabilitation intervention that has made impressive translation into the knowledge and practice of UK therapists. Therapists' opinions would suggest that GRASP is both an acceptable and feasible intervention and has the potential to be implemented by a greater number of therapists in a range of settings.
Authors: Dave Davis; Mike Evans; Alex Jadad; Laure Perrier; Darlyne Rath; David Ryan; Gary Sibbald; Sharon Straus; Susan Rappolt; Maria Wowk; Merrick Zwarenstein Journal: BMJ Date: 2003-07-05
Authors: E Taub; N E Miller; T A Novack; E W Cook; W C Fleming; C S Nepomuceno; J S Connell; J E Crago Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 1993-04 Impact factor: 3.966
Authors: Binith Cheeran; Leonardo Cohen; Bruce Dobkin; Gary Ford; Richard Greenwood; David Howard; Masud Husain; Malcolm Macleod; Randolph Nudo; John Rothwell; Anthony Rudd; James Teo; Nicholas Ward; Steven Wolf Journal: Neurorehabil Neural Repair Date: 2009-02 Impact factor: 3.919
Authors: Christian D Helfrich; Laura J Damschroder; Hildi J Hagedorn; Ginger S Daggett; Anju Sahay; Mona Ritchie; Teresa Damush; Marylou Guihan; Philip M Ullrich; Cheryl B Stetler Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2010-10-25 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: Louise A Connell; Naoimh E McMahon; Jocelyn E Harris; Caroline L Watkins; Janice J Eng Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2014-08-12 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: Louise A Connell; Naoimh E McMahon; Judith Redfern; Caroline L Watkins; Janice J Eng Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2015-03-12 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: Louise E Craig; Natalie Taylor; Rohan Grimley; Dominique A Cadilhac; Elizabeth McInnes; Rosemary Phillips; Simeon Dale; Denise O'Connor; Chris Levi; Mark Fitzgerald; Julie Considine; Jeremy M Grimshaw; Richard Gerraty; N Wah Cheung; Jeanette Ward; Sandy Middleton Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2017-07-17 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: Melanie Barwick; Raluca Barac; Melissa Kimber; Lindsay Akrong; Sabine N Johnson; Charles E Cunningham; Kathryn Bennett; Graham Ashbourne; Tim Godden Journal: Transl Behav Med Date: 2020-08-07 Impact factor: 3.046
Authors: M Alexis Kirk; Caitlin Kelley; Nicholas Yankey; Sarah A Birken; Brenton Abadie; Laura Damschroder Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2016-05-17 Impact factor: 7.327