Caitlin Hamilton1, Annie McCluskey1, Leanne Hassett1,2, Maggie Killington3, Meryl Lovarini1. 1. 1 Faculty of Health Sciences, The University of Sydney, Lidcombe, NSW, Australia. 2. 2 Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia. 3. 3 Department of Rehabilitation Aged and Extended Care, Flinders University, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To explore how technologies are used and experienced in rehabilitation. DESIGN: A qualitative study using a grounded theory approach within a randomized controlled trial investigating the effectiveness of tailored, affordable technologies to improve mobility and physical activity. SETTINGS: Aged care and neurological rehabilitation wards with community follow-up. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty patients undergoing rehabilitation and randomized to the experimental arm of a trial (mean age 64 years (SD 23)) were recruited for interviews, plus 11 physiotherapists involved in technology prescription as part of the trial. METHOD: Two interviews per patient (one in hospital, one post-discharge) and four focus groups with physiotherapists were conducted. Transcribed data were coded and synthesized. Memo-writing and constant comparison methods guided data analysis. RESULTS: A process of patient engagement with technology involving two stages: (1) initial patient engagement and (2) maintaining patient engagement was identified. Therapists used a series of steps and strategies to gain and maintain patient engagement. A positive first experience and continued input into patient programmes was needed. The level of patient engagement was not consistent across the duration of the trial, increasing or decreasing due to changes in the technologies prescribed or setting of use. Two conditions were key to optimizing patient engagement: sufficient support and perceived benefit from using technology. CONCLUSIONS: Patients can engage with technology during rehabilitation when prescription is tailored by a therapist. Perceiving benefit from using technology, in addition to receiving the right support to enable use appears to influence the level of patient engagement.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To explore how technologies are used and experienced in rehabilitation. DESIGN: A qualitative study using a grounded theory approach within a randomized controlled trial investigating the effectiveness of tailored, affordable technologies to improve mobility and physical activity. SETTINGS: Aged care and neurological rehabilitation wards with community follow-up. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty patients undergoing rehabilitation and randomized to the experimental arm of a trial (mean age 64 years (SD 23)) were recruited for interviews, plus 11 physiotherapists involved in technology prescription as part of the trial. METHOD: Two interviews per patient (one in hospital, one post-discharge) and four focus groups with physiotherapists were conducted. Transcribed data were coded and synthesized. Memo-writing and constant comparison methods guided data analysis. RESULTS: A process of patient engagement with technology involving two stages: (1) initial patient engagement and (2) maintaining patient engagement was identified. Therapists used a series of steps and strategies to gain and maintain patient engagement. A positive first experience and continued input into patient programmes was needed. The level of patient engagement was not consistent across the duration of the trial, increasing or decreasing due to changes in the technologies prescribed or setting of use. Two conditions were key to optimizing patient engagement: sufficient support and perceived benefit from using technology. CONCLUSIONS:Patients can engage with technology during rehabilitation when prescription is tailored by a therapist. Perceiving benefit from using technology, in addition to receiving the right support to enable use appears to influence the level of patient engagement.
Authors: Siobhan Wong; Leanne Hassett; Harriet Koorts; Anne Grunseit; Allison Tong; Anne Tiedemann; Colin J Greaves; Abby Haynes; Andrew Milat; Lisa A Harvey; Nicholas F Taylor; Rana S Hinman; Marina De Barros Pinherio; Matthew Jennings; Daniel Treacy; Sandra O'Rourke; Courtney West; Elizabeth Ramsay; Catherine Kirkham; Claire Morris; Catherine Sherrington Journal: Trials Date: 2022-01-15 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Katharine Scrivener; Jessica Sewastenko; Alexandra Bouvier-Farrell; Katherine MacDonald; Tegan Van Rijn; Joshua Tezak; Nicholas Mandis; Sherrie Love Journal: Stroke Res Treat Date: 2021-04-27
Authors: Leanne Hassett; Maayken van den Berg; Richard I Lindley; Maria Crotty; Annie McCluskey; Hidde P van der Ploeg; Stuart T Smith; Karl Schurr; Kirsten Howard; Maree L Hackett; Maggie Killington; Bert Bongers; Leanne Togher; Daniel Treacy; Simone Dorsch; Siobhan Wong; Katharine Scrivener; Sakina Chagpar; Heather Weber; Marina Pinheiro; Stephane Heritier; Catherine Sherrington Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2020-02-18 Impact factor: 11.069
Authors: Leanne Hassett; Anne Tiedemann; Rana S Hinman; Maria Crotty; Tammy Hoffmann; Lisa Harvey; Nicholas F Taylor; Colin Greaves; Daniel Treacy; Matthew Jennings; Andrew Milat; Kim L Bennell; Kirsten Howard; Maayken van den Berg; Marina Pinheiro; Siobhan Wong; Catherine Kirkham; Elizabeth Ramsay; Sandra O'Rourke; Catherine Sherrington Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2020-11-03 Impact factor: 2.692