Translation of evidence-based Assistive Technologies into stroke rehabilitation: Users' perceptions of the barriers and opportunities

BMC Health Services Research

Volumn 14, Issue 1, 2014, Pages

  Hughes, Ann Marie ^a   Burridge, Jane Helena ^a   Demain, Sara Holtum ^a   Ellis Hill, Caroline ^b   Meagher, Claire ^a   Tedesco Triccas, Lisa ^a   Turk, Ruth ^a   Swain, Ian ^b,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON   (United Kingdom)

^b BOURNEMOUTH UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^c SALISBURY NHS FOUNDATION TRUST   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Assistive technology; Perceptions; Stroke rehabilitation; Translation into practice; Upper limb

Indexed keywords

ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; HEALTH PERSONNEL ATTITUDE; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; PSYCHOLOGY; QUESTIONNAIRE; SELF HELP DEVICE; STROKE; UTILIZATION;

ATTITUDE OF HEALTH PERSONNEL; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; FOCUS GROUPS; HEALTH PERSONNEL; HUMANS; QUESTIONNAIRES; SELF-HELP DEVICES; STROKE;

EID: 84899482854     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14726963     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1472-6963-14-124     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Quantifying the value of stroke disability outcomes: WHO global burden of disease project disability weights for each level of the modified rankin scale * supplemental mathematical appendix. Hong KS, Saver JL, Stroke 2009 40 12 3828 3833 10.1161/STROKEAHA.109.561365 19797698
2. Cost of stroke in the United Kingdom. Saka O, McGuire A, Wolfe C, Age Ageing 2009 1 38(1) 27 32
3. Factors influencing stroke Survivors' quality of life during subacute recovery. Nichols-Larsen DS, Clark PC, Zeringue A, Greenspan A, Blanton S, Stroke 2005 36 7 1480 1484 10.1161/01.STR.0000170706.13595.4f 15947263 (Pubitemid 40967516)
4. Cost of stroke in Europe. Truelsena T, Ekmanb M, Boysen G, Eur J Neurol 2005 12 Suppl 1 78 84 15877785 (Pubitemid 40755610)
5. Department of Health, National Stroke Strategy 2007 Report No.: DH-081062
6. Forster A, Young J, The Clinical and Cost-Effectiveness of Physiotherapy in the Management of Elderly People Following a Stroke London: Chartered Society of Physiotherapy 2002
7. The hemiplegic arm after stroke: measurement and recovery. Wade DT, Langton-Hewer R, Wood VA, Skilbeck CE, Ismail HM, J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1983 46 6 521 524 10.1136/jnnp.46.6.521 6875585 (Pubitemid 13099699)
8. Royal College of Physicians National clinical guidelines for stroke, Prepared by the Intercollegiate Stroke Working Party London: Royal College of Physicians 4 2012
9. Stroke Association, Stroke Statistics Fact Sheet London: Stroke Association 2010
10. Chartered Society of Physiotherapy, CSP Research Priorities Project London: CSP London 2010
11. Boddice G, Brauer S, Gustafsson L, Kenardy J, Hoffmann T, National Stroke Foundation, Clinical Guidelines for Stroke Management 2010 Melbourne, Australia: National Stroke Foundation 2010 ISSBN0-978-0-9805933-3-4)
12. US VA/DOD The Management of stroke rehabilitationWorking Group, Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of Stroke Rehabilitation Version 2.0 2010
13. Effects of intensity of rehabilitation after stroke: a research synthesis. Kwakkel G, Wagenaar RC, Koelman TW, Lankhorst GJ, Koetsier JC, Stroke 1997 28 8 1550 1556 10.1161/01.STR.28.8.1550 9259747 (Pubitemid 27349680)
14. Major trends in mobility technology research and development: overview of the results of the NSF-WTEC European study. Reinkensmeyer DJ, Bonato P, Boninger ML, Chan L, Cowan RE, Fregly BJ, Rodgers MM, J Neuroeng Rehabil 2012 9 22 http://www.jneuroengrehab.com/content/9/1/22 10.1186/1743-0003-9-22 22520596
15. A functional MRI study of subjects recovered from hemiparetic stroke. Cramer SC, Nelles G, Benson RR, Kaplan JD, Parker RA, Kwong KK, Kennedy DN, Finklestein SP, Rosen BR, Stroke 1997 28 12 2518 2527 10.1161/01.STR.28.12.2518 9412643 (Pubitemid 28007661)
16. Arm function after stroke: from physiology to recovery. Krakauer JW, Semin Neurol 2005 25 4 384 395 10.1055/s-2005-923533 16341995
17. Mehrholz J, Platz T, Kugler J, Pohl M, Electromechanical and Robot-Assisted arm Training for Improving arm Function and Activities of Daily Living After Stroke Ltd Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons Art. No.: CD006876 2008
18. Motor recovery after stroke: a systematic review. Langhorne P, Coupar F, Pollock A, Lancet Neurol 2009 8 8 741 754 10.1016/S1474-4422(09)70150-4 19608100
19. Sirtori V, Corbetta D, Moja L, Gatti R, Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy for Upper Extremities in Stroke Patients. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 4 2009 Art. No.: CD004433. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004433. pub2.4
20. Virtual reality in stroke rehabilitation: a meta-analysis and implications for clinicians. Saposnik G, Levin M, for the Stroke Outcome Research Canada (SORCan) Working Group, Stroke 2011 1 42(5) 1380 1386
21. Impact of early applied upper limb stimulation: the EXPLICIT-stroke programme design. Kwakkel G, Meskers CGM, van Wegen EE, Lankhorst GJ, Geurts ACH, van Kuijk AA, Lindeman E, Visser-Meily A, de Vlugt E, Arendzen JH, BMC Neurol 2008 8 49 10.1186/1471-2377-8-49 19091088
22. Back from the brink: electromyography-triggered stimulation combined with modified constraint-induced movement therapy in chronic stroke. Page SJ, Levine P, Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2006 87 1 27 31 10.1016/j.apmr.2005.07.307 16401434 (Pubitemid 43053300)
23. Combined botulinum toxin type a with modified constraint-induced movement therapy for chronic stroke patients with upper extremity spasticity: a randomized controlled study. Sun SF, Hsu CW, Sun HP, Hwang CW, Yang CL, Wang JL, Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2010 24 1 34 41 10.1177/1545968309341060 19729582
24. Assessment and training in a 3-dimensional virtual environment with haptics: a report on 5 cases of motor rehabilitation in the chronic stage after stroke. Broeren J, Rydmark M, Bj + Ârkdahl A, Sunnerhagen KS, Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2007 21 2 180 189 10.1177/1545968306290774 17312093
25. Combined transcranial direct current stimulation and robot-assisted arm training in subacute stroke patients: a pilot study. Hesse S, Werner C, Schonhardt EM, Bardeleben A, Jenrich W, Kirker SG, Restor Neurol Neurosci 2007 25 9 15 17473391 (Pubitemid 46631009)
26. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation as an adjunct to constraint-induced therapy: an exploratory randomized controlled trial. Malcolm MP, Triggs WJ, Light KE, Gonzalez Rothi LJ, Wu S, Reid K, Nadeau SE, Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2007 86 707 715 10.1097/PHM.0b013e31813e0de0 17709994 (Pubitemid 47300967)
27. Assistive Technologies after stroke: self-management or fending for yourself? Demain SH, Burridge J, Ellis-Hill C, Hughes AM, Yardley L, Swain I, BMC Health Serv Res 2013 13 334 10.1186/1472-6963-13-334 23968362
28. Pomeroy VM, King L, Pollock A, Baily-Hallam A, Langhorne P, Electrostimulation for Promoting Recovery of Movement or Functional Ability After Stroke Art. No.: CD003241 2006
29. Selecting, designing, and developing your questionnaire. Boynton PM, Greenhalgh T, BMJ 2004 328 1312 1315 10.1136/bmj.328.7451.1312 15166072
30. Administering, analysing, and reporting your questionnaire. Boynton PM, BMJ 2004 328 1372 1375 10.1136/bmj.328.7452.1372 15178620
31. Increasing response rates to postal questionnaires: systematic review. Edwards P, Roberts I, Clarke M, DiGuiseppi C, Pratap S, Wentz R, Kwan I, BMJ 2002 324 1183 10.1136/bmj.324.7347.1183 12016181
32. Research into using technologies in stroke rehabilitation-Volunteers Wanted. Hughes AM, Differ Strokes Newslett 2010 44
33. The future of restorative neurosciences in stroke: driving the translational research pipeline from basic science to rehabilitation of people after stroke. Cheeran B, Cohen L, Dobkin B, Ford G, Greenwood R, Howard D, Husain M, Macleod M, Nudo R, Rothwell J, Rudd A, Teo J, Ward N, Wolf S, Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2009 23 2 97 107 19189939
34. Potential for new technologies in clinical practice. Burridge JH, Hughes AM, Curr Opin Neurol 2010 23 671 677 10.1097/WCO.0b013e3283402af5 20962639
35. Evidence based review of stroke rehabilitatio n. Teasell R, Foley N, Salter K, Bhogal RS, Bayona N, Jutai J, Speechley M, 2013 Available at: http://www.ebrsr.com
36. Need- and task-based design and evaluation. Cook AM, Polgar JM, Livingston NJ, Design and Use of Assistive Technologies: Social, Technical, Ethics and Economic Challenges New York, New York, Dordrecht Heidelberg London: Springer, Oishi MNK Mitchell IIM, Van der Loos HFM, 2010 41 47
37. An economic analysis of robot-assisted therapy for long-term upper-limb impairment after stroke. Wagner TH, Lo AC, Peduzzi P, Bravata DM, Huang GD, Krebs HI, Ringer RJ, Federman DG, Richards LG, Haselkorn JK, Wittenberg GF, Volpe BT, Bever CT, Duncan PW, Siroka A, Guarino PD, Stroke 2011 42 9 2630 2632 10.1161/STROKEAHA.110.606442 21757677
38. Predicting technology acceptance and adoption by the elderly: a qualitative study. Renaud K, van Biljon J, Proceedings of SAICSIT Wilderness, South Africa: Wilderness Beach Hotel 2008
39. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. Davis FD, MIS Q 1989 13 3 319 340 10.2307/249008
40. Development and test of a theory of technological learning and usage. Bagozzi RP, Davis FD, Warshaw PR, Hum Relat 1992 45 7 660 686
41. Determinants of perceived ease of use: Integrating control, intrinsic motivation, and emotion into the technology acceptance model. Venkatesh V, Inf Syst Res 2000 11 4 342 365 10.1287/isre.11.4.342.11872 (Pubitemid 33224535)
42. User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. Venkatesh V, Morris MG, Davis GB, Davis FD, MIS Q 2003 27 3 425 478
43. Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Venkatesh V, Bala H, Decis Sci 2008 39 2 273 315 10.1111/j.1540-5915.2008.00192. x
44. Rogers EM, Diffusion of Innovations New York: The Free Press 2003
45. Design and the domestication of information and communication technologies: technical change and everyday life. Silverstone R, Haddon L, Communication by Design: The Politics of Information and Communication Technologies Oxford University: Oxford 1996 44 74
46. A rational model for assessing and evaluating complex interventions in health care. May C, BMC Health Serv Res 2006 6 86 10.1186/1472-6963-6-86 16827928 (Pubitemid 44214752)
47. Barriers to achieving evidence-based stroke rehabilitation. Pollock AS, Legg L, Langhorne P, Sellars C, Clin Rehabil 2000 14 6 611 617 10.1191/0269215500cr369oa 11128736