Coproducing Knowledge of the Implementation of Complex Digital Health Interventions for Adults with Acquired Brain Injury and their Communication Partners: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study.

acquired brain injury brain injury caregivers delivery of health care implementation science internet interventions mobile phone priority setting public involvement speech-language pathology

Journal

JMIR research protocols
ISSN: 1929-0748
Titre abrégé: JMIR Res Protoc
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 101599504

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
10 Jan 2022
Historique:
received: 20 11 2021
accepted: 24 11 2021
entrez: 10 1 2022
pubmed: 11 1 2022
medline: 11 1 2022
Statut: epublish

Résumé

The Social Brain Toolkit, conceived and developed in partnership with stakeholders, is a novel suite of web-based communication interventions for people with brain injury and their communication partners. To support effective implementation, the developers of the Social Brain Toolkit have collaborated with people with brain injury, communication partners, clinicians, and individuals with digital health implementation experience to coproduce new implementation knowledge. In recognition of the equal value of experiential and academic knowledge, both types of knowledge are included in this study protocol, with input from stakeholder coauthors. This study aims to collaborate with stakeholders to prioritize theoretically based implementation targets for the Social Brain Toolkit, understand the nature of these priorities, and develop targeted implementation strategies to address these priorities, in order to support the Social Brain Toolkit's implementation. Theoretically underpinned by the Nonadoption, Abandonment, Scale-up, Spread, and Sustainability (NASSS) framework of digital health implementation, a maximum variation sample (N=35) of stakeholders coproduced knowledge of the implementation of the Social Brain Toolkit. People with brain injury (n=10), communication partners (n=11), and clinicians (n=5) participated in an initial web-based prioritization survey based on the NASSS framework. Survey completion was facilitated by plain English explanations and accessible captioned videos developed through 3 rounds of piloting. A speech-language pathologist also assisted stakeholders with brain injury to participate in the survey via video teleconference. Participants subsequently elaborated on their identified priorities via 7 web-based focus groups, in which researchers and stakeholders exchanged stakeholder perspectives and research evidence from a concurrent systematic review. Stakeholders were supported to engage in focus groups through the use of visual supports and plain English explanations. Additionally, individuals with experience in digital health implementation (n=9) responded to the prioritization survey questions via individual interview. The results will be deductively analyzed in relation to the NASSS framework in a coauthorship process with people with brain injury, communication partners, and clinicians. Ethical approval was received from the University of Technology Sydney Health and Medical Research Ethics Committee (ETH20-5466) on December 15, 2020. Data were collected from April 13 to November 18, 2021. Data analysis is currently underway, with results expected for publication in mid-2022. In this study, researchers supported individuals with living experience of acquired brain injury, of communicating with or clinically supporting someone post injury, and of digital health implementation, to directly access and leverage the latest implementation research evidence and theory. With this support, stakeholders were able to prioritize implementation research targets, develop targeted implementation solutions, and coauthor and publish new implementation findings. The results will be used to optimize the implementation of 3 real-world, evidence-based interventions and thus improve the outcomes of people with brain injury and their communication partners. DERR1-10.2196/35080.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
The Social Brain Toolkit, conceived and developed in partnership with stakeholders, is a novel suite of web-based communication interventions for people with brain injury and their communication partners. To support effective implementation, the developers of the Social Brain Toolkit have collaborated with people with brain injury, communication partners, clinicians, and individuals with digital health implementation experience to coproduce new implementation knowledge. In recognition of the equal value of experiential and academic knowledge, both types of knowledge are included in this study protocol, with input from stakeholder coauthors.
OBJECTIVE OBJECTIVE
This study aims to collaborate with stakeholders to prioritize theoretically based implementation targets for the Social Brain Toolkit, understand the nature of these priorities, and develop targeted implementation strategies to address these priorities, in order to support the Social Brain Toolkit's implementation.
METHODS METHODS
Theoretically underpinned by the Nonadoption, Abandonment, Scale-up, Spread, and Sustainability (NASSS) framework of digital health implementation, a maximum variation sample (N=35) of stakeholders coproduced knowledge of the implementation of the Social Brain Toolkit. People with brain injury (n=10), communication partners (n=11), and clinicians (n=5) participated in an initial web-based prioritization survey based on the NASSS framework. Survey completion was facilitated by plain English explanations and accessible captioned videos developed through 3 rounds of piloting. A speech-language pathologist also assisted stakeholders with brain injury to participate in the survey via video teleconference. Participants subsequently elaborated on their identified priorities via 7 web-based focus groups, in which researchers and stakeholders exchanged stakeholder perspectives and research evidence from a concurrent systematic review. Stakeholders were supported to engage in focus groups through the use of visual supports and plain English explanations. Additionally, individuals with experience in digital health implementation (n=9) responded to the prioritization survey questions via individual interview. The results will be deductively analyzed in relation to the NASSS framework in a coauthorship process with people with brain injury, communication partners, and clinicians.
RESULTS RESULTS
Ethical approval was received from the University of Technology Sydney Health and Medical Research Ethics Committee (ETH20-5466) on December 15, 2020. Data were collected from April 13 to November 18, 2021. Data analysis is currently underway, with results expected for publication in mid-2022.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
In this study, researchers supported individuals with living experience of acquired brain injury, of communicating with or clinically supporting someone post injury, and of digital health implementation, to directly access and leverage the latest implementation research evidence and theory. With this support, stakeholders were able to prioritize implementation research targets, develop targeted implementation solutions, and coauthor and publish new implementation findings. The results will be used to optimize the implementation of 3 real-world, evidence-based interventions and thus improve the outcomes of people with brain injury and their communication partners.
INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID) UNASSIGNED
DERR1-10.2196/35080.

Identifiants

pubmed: 35006082
pii: v11i1e35080
doi: 10.2196/35080
pmc: PMC8787662
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

e35080

Informations de copyright

©Melissa Miao, Emma Power, Rachael Rietdijk, Deborah Debono, Melissa Brunner, Alexander Salomon, Ben Mcculloch, Meg Rebecca Wright, Monica Welsh, Bastian Tremblay, Caleb Rixon, Liz Williams, Rosemary Morrow, Jean-Christophe Evain, Leanne Togher. Originally published in JMIR Research Protocols (https://www.researchprotocols.org), 10.01.2022.

Références

Arch Rehabil Res Clin Transl. 2019 Dec 21;2(1):100036
pubmed: 33543065
J Med Internet Res. 2019 Sep 27;21(9):e14255
pubmed: 31573934
Health Res Policy Syst. 2020 May 7;18(1):43
pubmed: 32380998
Brain Behav. 2018 Aug;8(8):e01055
pubmed: 30022609
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2016 Jun 1;59(3):511-20
pubmed: 27124205
BMC Med. 2018 May 14;16(1):66
pubmed: 29754584
Health Soc Care Community. 2019 Mar;27(2):493-501
pubmed: 30378213
BMC Med Ethics. 2015 Nov 16;16:78
pubmed: 26573410
Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2021 Jan 27;30(1):19-33
pubmed: 33332986
Internet Interv. 2019 Jul 24;18:100260
pubmed: 31890613
Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2017 Jul;47:48-60
pubmed: 28807138
Brain Inj. 2019;33(1):94-104
pubmed: 30325220
Lancet. 2021 Dec 19;396(10267):2006-2017
pubmed: 33275908
NeuroRehabilitation. 2016 Mar 23;38(3):243-55
pubmed: 27030901
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2007 Aug;64(8):966-74
pubmed: 17679641
Brain Inj. 1997 Mar;11(3):169-89
pubmed: 9057999
Implement Sci. 2016 Oct 26;11(1):146
pubmed: 27782832
Occup Ther Health Care. 2018 Apr;32(2):154-171
pubmed: 29578827
J Med Internet Res. 2018 May 01;20(5):e10235
pubmed: 29716883
Internet Interv. 2018 Apr 06;12:181-188
pubmed: 30135782
Int J Stroke. 2016 Jun;11(4):459-84
pubmed: 27079654
Med Care. 2012 Mar;50(3):217-26
pubmed: 22310560
Digit Health. 2021 Sep 6;7:20552076211035988
pubmed: 34567610
J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2014 Jul-Aug;29(4):353-68
pubmed: 24984097
Health Res Policy Syst. 2019 Mar 28;17(1):33
pubmed: 30922339
Health Res Policy Syst. 2020 Feb 11;18(1):17
pubmed: 32046728
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2021 Feb 15;28(2):284-293
pubmed: 33043359
Brain Inj. 2017;31(13-14):1760-1780
pubmed: 29064304
Stud Health Technol Inform. 2019 Jul 30;263:193-204
pubmed: 31411163
Brain Inj. 2007 Nov;21(12):1259-66
pubmed: 18236201
JMIR Res Protoc. 2020 May 13;9(5):e16861
pubmed: 32401224
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2019 Dec 28;19(1):243
pubmed: 31883517
J Med Internet Res. 2017 Nov 01;19(11):e367
pubmed: 29092808
JMIR Res Protoc. 2021 Dec 9;10(12):e31995
pubmed: 34889770
Health Expect. 2019 Jun;22(3):284-297
pubmed: 30604580
Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord. 2019;47(1-2):42-54
pubmed: 30630168
Lancet Neurol. 2019 May;18(5):459-480
pubmed: 30879893
Int J Ment Health Nurs. 2018 Aug;27(4):1273-1281
pubmed: 29920906
J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2020 Jul/Aug;35(4):241-253
pubmed: 31996605

Auteurs

Melissa Miao (M)

University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia.

Emma Power (E)

University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia.

Rachael Rietdijk (R)

University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.

Deborah Debono (D)

University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia.

Melissa Brunner (M)

University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.

Alexander Salomon (A)

See Authors' Contributions, Australia.

Ben Mcculloch (B)

See Authors' Contributions, Australia.

Meg Rebecca Wright (MR)

See Authors' Contributions, Australia.

Monica Welsh (M)

See Authors' Contributions, Australia.
Brain Injury Rehabilitation Unit, South Australian Brain Injury Rehabilitation Service, Hampstead Rehabilitation Centre, Adelaide, Australia.

Bastian Tremblay (B)

See Authors' Contributions, Australia.

Caleb Rixon (C)

See Authors' Contributions, Australia.
Genyus Network, Melbourne, Australia.

Liz Williams (L)

See Authors' Contributions, Australia.
Brain Injury Rehabilitation Community and Home, South Australian Brain Injury Rehabilitation Service, Hampstead Rehabilitation Centre, Adelaide, Australia.

Rosemary Morrow (R)

See Authors' Contributions, Australia.

Jean-Christophe Evain (JC)

See Authors' Contributions, Australia.
Acquired Brain Injury Rehabilitation Centre, Caulfield Hospital, Alfred Health Network, Melbourne, Australia.

Leanne Togher (L)

University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.

Classifications MeSH