Clinicians' Experiences of Implementing a Telerehabilitation Toolkit During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Qualitative Descriptive Study.

COVID-19 clinician implementation qualitative telerehabilitation toolkit

Journal

JMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies
ISSN: 2369-2529
Titre abrégé: JMIR Rehabil Assist Technol
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 101703412

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
10 Mar 2023
Historique:
received: 24 11 2022
accepted: 27 02 2023
revised: 01 02 2023
entrez: 10 3 2023
pubmed: 11 3 2023
medline: 11 3 2023
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Although the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a rapid implementation and scale-up of telehealth for patients in need of rehabilitation, an overall slower scaling up to telerehabilitation has been documented. The purpose of this study was to understand experiences of implementing telerehabilitation during the COVID-19 pandemic as well as using the Toronto Rehab Telerehab Toolkit from the perspective of rehabilitation professionals across Canada and internationally. The study adopted a qualitative descriptive approach that consisted of telephone- or videoconference-supported interviews and focus groups. Participants included rehabilitation providers as well as health care leaders who had used the Toronto Rehab Telerehab Toolkit. Each participant took part in a semi-structured interview or focus group, lasting approximately 30-40 minutes. Thematic analysis was used to understand the barriers and enablers of providing telerehabilitation and implementing the Toronto Rehab Telerehab Toolkit. Three members of the research team independently analyzed a set of the same transcripts and met after each set to discuss their analysis. A total of 22 participants participated, and 7 interviews and 4 focus groups were included. The data of participants were collected from both Canadian (Alberta, New Brunswick, and Ontario) and international sites (Australia, Greece, and South Korea). A total of 11 sites were represented, 5 of which focused on neurological rehabilitation. Participants included health care providers (ie, physicians, occupational therapists, physical therapists, speech language pathologists, and social workers), managers and system leaders, as well as research and education professionals. Overall, 4 themes were identified including (1) implementation considerations for telerehabilitation, encompassing 2 subthemes of "infrastructure, equipment, and space" and "leadership and organizational support"; (2) innovations developed as a result of telerehabilitation; (3) the toolkit as a catalyst for implementing telerehabilitation; and (4) recommendations for improving the toolkit. Findings from this qualitative study confirm some of the previously identified experiences with implementing telerehabilitation, but from the perspective of Canadian and international rehabilitation providers and leaders. These findings include the importance of adequate infrastructure, equipment, and space; the key role of organizational or leadership support in adopting telerehabilitation; and availing resources to implement it. Importantly, participants in our study described the toolkit as an important resource to broker networking opportunities and highlighted the need to pivot to telerehabilitation, especially early in the pandemic. Findings from this study will be used to improve the next iteration of the toolkit (Toolkit 2.0) to promote safe, accessible, and effective telerehabilitation to those patients in need in the future.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Although the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a rapid implementation and scale-up of telehealth for patients in need of rehabilitation, an overall slower scaling up to telerehabilitation has been documented.
OBJECTIVE OBJECTIVE
The purpose of this study was to understand experiences of implementing telerehabilitation during the COVID-19 pandemic as well as using the Toronto Rehab Telerehab Toolkit from the perspective of rehabilitation professionals across Canada and internationally.
METHODS METHODS
The study adopted a qualitative descriptive approach that consisted of telephone- or videoconference-supported interviews and focus groups. Participants included rehabilitation providers as well as health care leaders who had used the Toronto Rehab Telerehab Toolkit. Each participant took part in a semi-structured interview or focus group, lasting approximately 30-40 minutes. Thematic analysis was used to understand the barriers and enablers of providing telerehabilitation and implementing the Toronto Rehab Telerehab Toolkit. Three members of the research team independently analyzed a set of the same transcripts and met after each set to discuss their analysis.
RESULTS RESULTS
A total of 22 participants participated, and 7 interviews and 4 focus groups were included. The data of participants were collected from both Canadian (Alberta, New Brunswick, and Ontario) and international sites (Australia, Greece, and South Korea). A total of 11 sites were represented, 5 of which focused on neurological rehabilitation. Participants included health care providers (ie, physicians, occupational therapists, physical therapists, speech language pathologists, and social workers), managers and system leaders, as well as research and education professionals. Overall, 4 themes were identified including (1) implementation considerations for telerehabilitation, encompassing 2 subthemes of "infrastructure, equipment, and space" and "leadership and organizational support"; (2) innovations developed as a result of telerehabilitation; (3) the toolkit as a catalyst for implementing telerehabilitation; and (4) recommendations for improving the toolkit.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
Findings from this qualitative study confirm some of the previously identified experiences with implementing telerehabilitation, but from the perspective of Canadian and international rehabilitation providers and leaders. These findings include the importance of adequate infrastructure, equipment, and space; the key role of organizational or leadership support in adopting telerehabilitation; and availing resources to implement it. Importantly, participants in our study described the toolkit as an important resource to broker networking opportunities and highlighted the need to pivot to telerehabilitation, especially early in the pandemic. Findings from this study will be used to improve the next iteration of the toolkit (Toolkit 2.0) to promote safe, accessible, and effective telerehabilitation to those patients in need in the future.

Identifiants

pubmed: 36897634
pii: v10i1e44591
doi: 10.2196/44591
pmc: PMC10039414
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

e44591

Informations de copyright

©Sarah Munce, Angie Andreoli, Mark Bayley, Meiqi Guo, Elizabeth L Inness, Ailene Kua, McKyla McIntyre. Originally published in JMIR Rehabilitation and Assistive Technology (https://rehab.jmir.org), 10.03.2023.

Références

Circulation. 2020 May 26;141(21):e823-e831
pubmed: 32228309
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Apr 09;(4):CD010508
pubmed: 25854331
Res Nurs Health. 2000 Aug;23(4):334-40
pubmed: 10940958
Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2020 Jun;56(3):327-330
pubmed: 32329593
Spinal Cord. 2022 May;60(5):395-403
pubmed: 35411024
J Rural Health. 2008 Fall;24(4):337-44
pubmed: 19007387
J Rehabil Res Dev. 2015;52(3):361-70
pubmed: 26230650
Lancet Digit Health. 2022 Apr;4(4):e279-e289
pubmed: 35337644
Eur Heart J Digit Health. 2021 Dec 10;3(1):81-89
pubmed: 36713984
J Multidiscip Healthc. 2017 Jan 20;10:41-47
pubmed: 28182140
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2020 Jul 1;27(7):1132-1135
pubmed: 32324855
Int J Telerehabil. 2017 Nov 20;9(2):63-68
pubmed: 29238450
BMC Neurol. 2013 Sep 04;13:115
pubmed: 24134554
Int J Qual Health Care. 2007 Dec;19(6):349-57
pubmed: 17872937
Front Public Health. 2022 Mar 04;10:831762
pubmed: 35309184
Res Nurs Health. 2010 Feb;33(1):77-84
pubmed: 20014004
Int J Telerehabil. 2010 Oct 27;2(2):31-4
pubmed: 25945175
Home Healthc Now. 2016 Sep;34(8):440-6
pubmed: 27580283
J Telemed Telecare. 2011;17(1):1-6
pubmed: 21097560

Auteurs

Sarah Munce (S)

KITE Research Institute, Toronto Rehabilitation Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Department of Occupational Science and Occupational Therapy, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Rehabilitation Sciences Institute, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Angie Andreoli (A)

Department of Physical Therapy, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Toronto Rehabilitation Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Mark Bayley (M)

KITE Research Institute, Toronto Rehabilitation Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Rehabilitation Sciences Institute, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Division of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Meiqi Guo (M)

Toronto Rehabilitation Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Division of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Elizabeth L Inness (EL)

KITE Research Institute, Toronto Rehabilitation Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Rehabilitation Sciences Institute, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Department of Physical Therapy, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Ailene Kua (A)

KITE Research Institute, Toronto Rehabilitation Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.

McKyla McIntyre (M)

Toronto Rehabilitation Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Division of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Classifications MeSH