COVID-19 期间大学生物理治疗诊所的远程保健可用性。

IF 1.5 Q3 RHEUMATOLOGY Musculoskeletal Care Pub Date : 2024-06-01 DOI:10.1002/msc.1906
Maureen McEvoy, Caroline Fryer, Emily Ward, Saravana Kumar
{"title":"COVID-19 期间大学生物理治疗诊所的远程保健可用性。","authors":"Maureen McEvoy, Caroline Fryer, Emily Ward, Saravana Kumar","doi":"10.1002/msc.1906","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>'Telehealth' online delivery of physiotherapy was the only option during the Covid 19 pandemic in many areas. This was a challenge for physiotherapy training in student clinics where students, clinical educators (CEs) and clients were in three separate locations. The aim of this study was to determine the usability and acceptability of online delivery in a physiotherapy student clinic.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An observational cross-sectional design was used. Clients (adult clients or carers of paediatric clients), students and CEs participated in telehealth physiotherapy appointments over a Telehealth platform called NeoRehab. The three groups were then invited to complete the Telehealth Usability Questionnaire (TUQ). The 21 item TUQ uses a 7-point Likert scale and covers six constructs (Usefulness, Ease of Use, Interface quality, Interaction quality, Reliability, Satisfaction).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data were analysed from 39 clients, 15 students, and seven CEs. The respective domain scores (SD) for Usefulness [(5.3 (1.5), 5.4 (0.7), 5.1 (0.7)] and Satisfaction [5.1 (1.6), 5.0 (1.0), 5.4 (0.7)] were similarly high across groups, while scores for Reliability [3.7 (1.5), 3.6 (1.0), 3.0 (0.5)] were similarly low across groups. Interface Quality [5.0 (1.5), 4.5 (1.2), 4.1 (0.8)] scores were similarly moderate. Ease of Use [5.6 (1.5), 5.3 (1.0), 4.1 (1.1)] scores were significantly higher in clients than CEs (p = 0.043). Interaction Quality [5.0 (1.4), 3.9 (1.3), 4.2 (0.9)] scores were significantly higher in clients compared with students (p = 0.03).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>All groups agreed that the delivery format was useful, easy to use and provided a satisfactory service but was not reliable.</p>","PeriodicalId":46945,"journal":{"name":"Musculoskeletal Care","volume":"22 2","pages":"e1906"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Telehealth usability in a university student physiotherapy clinic during COVID-19.\",\"authors\":\"Maureen McEvoy, Caroline Fryer, Emily Ward, Saravana Kumar\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/msc.1906\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>'Telehealth' online delivery of physiotherapy was the only option during the Covid 19 pandemic in many areas. This was a challenge for physiotherapy training in student clinics where students, clinical educators (CEs) and clients were in three separate locations. The aim of this study was to determine the usability and acceptability of online delivery in a physiotherapy student clinic.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An observational cross-sectional design was used. Clients (adult clients or carers of paediatric clients), students and CEs participated in telehealth physiotherapy appointments over a Telehealth platform called NeoRehab. The three groups were then invited to complete the Telehealth Usability Questionnaire (TUQ). The 21 item TUQ uses a 7-point Likert scale and covers six constructs (Usefulness, Ease of Use, Interface quality, Interaction quality, Reliability, Satisfaction).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data were analysed from 39 clients, 15 students, and seven CEs. The respective domain scores (SD) for Usefulness [(5.3 (1.5), 5.4 (0.7), 5.1 (0.7)] and Satisfaction [5.1 (1.6), 5.0 (1.0), 5.4 (0.7)] were similarly high across groups, while scores for Reliability [3.7 (1.5), 3.6 (1.0), 3.0 (0.5)] were similarly low across groups. Interface Quality [5.0 (1.5), 4.5 (1.2), 4.1 (0.8)] scores were similarly moderate. Ease of Use [5.6 (1.5), 5.3 (1.0), 4.1 (1.1)] scores were significantly higher in clients than CEs (p = 0.043). Interaction Quality [5.0 (1.4), 3.9 (1.3), 4.2 (0.9)] scores were significantly higher in clients compared with students (p = 0.03).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>All groups agreed that the delivery format was useful, easy to use and provided a satisfactory service but was not reliable.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46945,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Musculoskeletal Care\",\"volume\":\"22 2\",\"pages\":\"e1906\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Musculoskeletal Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/msc.1906\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"RHEUMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Musculoskeletal Care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/msc.1906","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RHEUMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:在 Covid 19 大流行期间,"远程保健 "在线提供物理治疗是许多地区的唯一选择。这对学生诊所的物理治疗培训是一个挑战,因为学生、临床教育者(CE)和客户分别在三个不同的地点。本研究旨在确定物理治疗学生诊所在线授课的可用性和可接受性:方法:采用观察性横断面设计。客户(成人客户或儿科客户的照顾者)、学生和行政主管通过名为 NeoRehab 的远程保健平台参与了远程保健物理治疗预约。然后邀请这三个小组填写远程保健可用性问卷(TUQ)。TUQ 共有 21 个项目,采用 7 点李克特量表,涵盖六个方面(实用性、易用性、界面质量、交互质量、可靠性、满意度):对 39 名客户、15 名学生和 7 名行政长官的数据进行了分析。有用性[(5.3 (1.5),5.4 (0.7),5.1 (0.7)]和满意度[5.1 (1.6),5.0 (1.0),5.4 (0.7)]的领域得分(标清)在各组中同样较高,而可靠性[3.7 (1.5),3.6 (1.0),3.0 (0.5)]的得分在各组中同样较低。界面质量[5.0 (1.5)、4.5 (1.2)、4.1 (0.8)]得分同样处于中等水平。客户的易用性[5.6 (1.5)、5.3 (1.0)、4.1 (1.1)]得分明显高于行政长官(p = 0.043)。客户的互动质量[5.0 (1.4)、3.9 (1.3)、4.2 (0.9)]得分明显高于学生(p = 0.03):所有小组都认为,这种授课形式有用、易用,提供的服务令人满意,但并不可靠。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Telehealth usability in a university student physiotherapy clinic during COVID-19.

Background: 'Telehealth' online delivery of physiotherapy was the only option during the Covid 19 pandemic in many areas. This was a challenge for physiotherapy training in student clinics where students, clinical educators (CEs) and clients were in three separate locations. The aim of this study was to determine the usability and acceptability of online delivery in a physiotherapy student clinic.

Methods: An observational cross-sectional design was used. Clients (adult clients or carers of paediatric clients), students and CEs participated in telehealth physiotherapy appointments over a Telehealth platform called NeoRehab. The three groups were then invited to complete the Telehealth Usability Questionnaire (TUQ). The 21 item TUQ uses a 7-point Likert scale and covers six constructs (Usefulness, Ease of Use, Interface quality, Interaction quality, Reliability, Satisfaction).

Results: Data were analysed from 39 clients, 15 students, and seven CEs. The respective domain scores (SD) for Usefulness [(5.3 (1.5), 5.4 (0.7), 5.1 (0.7)] and Satisfaction [5.1 (1.6), 5.0 (1.0), 5.4 (0.7)] were similarly high across groups, while scores for Reliability [3.7 (1.5), 3.6 (1.0), 3.0 (0.5)] were similarly low across groups. Interface Quality [5.0 (1.5), 4.5 (1.2), 4.1 (0.8)] scores were similarly moderate. Ease of Use [5.6 (1.5), 5.3 (1.0), 4.1 (1.1)] scores were significantly higher in clients than CEs (p = 0.043). Interaction Quality [5.0 (1.4), 3.9 (1.3), 4.2 (0.9)] scores were significantly higher in clients compared with students (p = 0.03).

Conclusions: All groups agreed that the delivery format was useful, easy to use and provided a satisfactory service but was not reliable.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Musculoskeletal Care
Musculoskeletal Care RHEUMATOLOGY-
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
88
期刊介绍: Musculoskeletal Care is a peer-reviewed journal for all health professionals committed to the clinical delivery of high quality care for people with musculoskeletal conditions and providing knowledge to support decision making by professionals, patients and policy makers. This journal publishes papers on original research, applied research, review articles and clinical guidelines. Regular topics include patient education, psychological and social impact, patient experiences of health care, clinical up dates and the effectiveness of therapy.
期刊最新文献
Improving Musculoskeletal Health by Incorporating Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Approaches Into Research Practices. Patients' Experiences, Satisfaction and Quality of Life With Physiotherapy Follow-Up After Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Phenomenological Qualitative Study Protocol. Physical Activity, Kinesiophobia, Pain Catastrophizing, Body Awareness, Depression and Disease Activity in Patients With Ankylosing Spondylitis and Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Cross-Sectional Explorative Study. Physiotherapists' Treatment Strategies and Delineation of Areas of Responsibility for People With Musculoskeletal Conditions and Comorbidities in Private Physiotherapy Practice: A Qualitative Study. The Effect of Telerehabilitation-Based Self-Management Programme on Individuals With Scleroderma.
×
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