Implementation of Standardized Outcome Measures for Motor Function in a Neurorehabilitation Hospital

Camilla Biering Lundquist, Susanne Lillelund, Gunhild Mo Hansen, Vibeke Dalgaard Knudsen, Uwe M. Pommerich, Hanne Pallesen, Iris Charlotte Brunner
{"title":"Implementation of Standardized Outcome Measures for Motor Function in a Neurorehabilitation Hospital","authors":"Camilla Biering Lundquist, Susanne Lillelund, Gunhild Mo Hansen, Vibeke Dalgaard Knudsen, Uwe M. Pommerich, Hanne Pallesen, Iris Charlotte Brunner","doi":"10.1007/s43477-023-00103-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract International guidelines recommend the use of standardized outcome measures post-stroke. The aim of this study was to delineate and evaluate the implementation of four motor function outcome measures. This study describes the application of a multifaceted strategy that integrates various approaches to augment implementation. The study was conducted among physical therapists in a sub-acute neurorehabilitation hospital. The implementation process was guided by the Knowledge-to-Action Cycle, and a taxonomy for implementation outcomes was systematically employed to analyze and evaluate the implementation process. Focus group interviews were conducted both prior and 6 months subsequent to an implementation period. Additionally, data from healthcare records were extracted to monitor the penetration of the new procedures. All 70 employed physical therapists underwent training on the application of the four selected outcome measures. Barriers identified in the focus group interviews encompassed perceived acceptability and appropriateness of the outcome measures, time consumption for testing, and perceived lack of relevance for certain patients. These barriers were mitigated through local adaptions. However, 6 months post-implementation, the adoption and penetration of the new procedures were only partially satisfactory. Some physical therapists still expressed reluctance toward employing outcome measures, and findings from the healthcare records corroborated the interview results. Specifically, adherence to testing procedures surpassed the pre-defined threshold of 75% for only one outcome measure at one pre-defined time point. A persistent effort is required to enhance acceptability, adoption, penetration, and to ensure the sustainability of the new procedures.","PeriodicalId":73165,"journal":{"name":"Global implementation research and applications","volume":"68 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global implementation research and applications","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s43477-023-00103-5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract International guidelines recommend the use of standardized outcome measures post-stroke. The aim of this study was to delineate and evaluate the implementation of four motor function outcome measures. This study describes the application of a multifaceted strategy that integrates various approaches to augment implementation. The study was conducted among physical therapists in a sub-acute neurorehabilitation hospital. The implementation process was guided by the Knowledge-to-Action Cycle, and a taxonomy for implementation outcomes was systematically employed to analyze and evaluate the implementation process. Focus group interviews were conducted both prior and 6 months subsequent to an implementation period. Additionally, data from healthcare records were extracted to monitor the penetration of the new procedures. All 70 employed physical therapists underwent training on the application of the four selected outcome measures. Barriers identified in the focus group interviews encompassed perceived acceptability and appropriateness of the outcome measures, time consumption for testing, and perceived lack of relevance for certain patients. These barriers were mitigated through local adaptions. However, 6 months post-implementation, the adoption and penetration of the new procedures were only partially satisfactory. Some physical therapists still expressed reluctance toward employing outcome measures, and findings from the healthcare records corroborated the interview results. Specifically, adherence to testing procedures surpassed the pre-defined threshold of 75% for only one outcome measure at one pre-defined time point. A persistent effort is required to enhance acceptability, adoption, penetration, and to ensure the sustainability of the new procedures.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
某神经康复医院运动功能标准化结果测量的实施
国际指南建议卒中后使用标准化的结果测量方法。本研究的目的是描述和评估四种运动功能结果测量的实施情况。本研究描述了一个多方面战略的应用,该战略整合了各种方法来增强实施。该研究是在一家亚急性神经康复医院的物理治疗师中进行的。实施过程以“从知识到行动”周期为指导,系统地采用实施结果分类法对实施过程进行分析和评价。焦点小组访谈是在执行期之前和之后6个月进行的。此外,从医疗记录中提取数据以监测新程序的渗透情况。所有70名受雇的物理治疗师都接受了四种选定结果测量方法的应用培训。在焦点小组访谈中发现的障碍包括结果测量的可接受性和适当性,测试的时间消耗,以及对某些患者缺乏相关性。这些障碍通过当地适应得到缓解。然而,在执行后6个月,新程序的通过和渗透只是部分令人满意。一些物理治疗师仍然表示不愿意采用结果测量,医疗记录的发现证实了访谈结果。具体来说,在一个预定义的时间点,只有一个结果测量,测试程序的依从性超过了75%的预定义阈值。需要持续的努力来提高新程序的可接受性、采用性、渗透性,并确保其可持续性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Conceptualisation of the SHIFT–SHARE: A New Strategic Healthcare Implementation Framework for Task Shifting, Sharing and Resource Enhancement Identifying and Prioritizing Factors to Improve Implementation of an Evidence-Based Program for Child Maltreatment Prevention in Rural Missouri Communities Implementation Determinants of Problem-Solving Therapy Delivered by Near-Peer Lay Counselors for Youth Living with HIV in Botswana: Lay Counsellor Perspectives Exploring Behaviour Change of Healthcare Professionals while Implementing a Complex Nursing Intervention: A Survey Study Usability Testing of a Web Tool for Dissemination and Implementation Science Models
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1