Alice Kelen Soper1,2, Andrea Cross1,3, Peter Rosenbaum1,4, Jan Willem Gorter1,4. 1. CanChild Centre for Childhood Disability Research, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada. 2. Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada. 3. School of Rehabilitation Science, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada. 4. Department of Pediatrics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.
Abstract
AIMS: The 'F-words in Childhood Disability' - operationalizing the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health Framework - have attracted great interest around the world. However, we have yet to learn how service providers (SPs) are using them. The aim of this study was to explore international SPs' attitudes toward and use of the 'F-words'. METHODS: A survey was administered, guided by the Theory of Planned Behavior, including Likert-scaled statements and an open-ended question. Ninety-one SPs working with children with impairments from 27 countries completed the survey. RESULTS: While 82 agreed the 'F-words' are good practice, only 60 are using the 'F-words'. Similarly, 52 SPs agreed that their colleagues approved of their use and 54 felt they were easy for families to use and understand. Respondents reported three main uses: (i) support of preexisting clinical approaches, (ii) direct integration into practice, and (iii) being taught in higher education. They also identified barriers to implementation (e.g., alternative clinical approaches and limited resources). CONCLUSIONS: Findings provide insights in how the 'F-words' are being used and the limitations thereof, which can inform future directions to support international implementation. With international SPs, we need to develop adapted dissemination tools to support uptake by individuals worldwide.
AIMS: The 'F-words in Childhood Disability' - operationalizing the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health Framework - have attracted great interest around the world. However, we have yet to learn how service providers (SPs) are using them. The aim of this study was to explore international SPs' attitudes toward and use of the 'F-words'. METHODS: A survey was administered, guided by the Theory of Planned Behavior, including Likert-scaled statements and an open-ended question. Ninety-one SPs working with children with impairments from 27 countries completed the survey. RESULTS: While 82 agreed the 'F-words' are good practice, only 60 are using the 'F-words'. Similarly, 52 SPs agreed that their colleagues approved of their use and 54 felt they were easy for families to use and understand. Respondents reported three main uses: (i) support of preexisting clinical approaches, (ii) direct integration into practice, and (iii) being taught in higher education. They also identified barriers to implementation (e.g., alternative clinical approaches and limited resources). CONCLUSIONS: Findings provide insights in how the 'F-words' are being used and the limitations thereof, which can inform future directions to support international implementation. With international SPs, we need to develop adapted dissemination tools to support uptake by individuals worldwide.
Entities:
Keywords:
F-words; ICF; International service providers; childhood disability; implementation science