Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBuckingham, SA
dc.contributor.authorSein, K
dc.contributor.authorAnil, K
dc.contributor.authorDemain, S
dc.contributor.authorGunn, H
dc.contributor.authorJones, RB
dc.contributor.authorKent, B
dc.contributor.authorLogan, A
dc.contributor.authorMarsden, J
dc.contributor.authorPlayford, ED
dc.contributor.authorFreeman, J
dc.date.accessioned2022-04-29T11:57:32Z
dc.date.issued2022-04-19
dc.identifier.issn1356-1294
dc.identifier.issn1365-2753
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/19125
dc.description.abstract

<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:sec><jats:title>Rationale, Aims and Objectives</jats:title><jats:p>Telerehabilitation was used to ensure continued provision of care during the COVID‐19 pandemic, but there was a lack of guidance on how to use it safely and effectively for people with physical disabilities and movement impairment. In this service evaluation, we aimed to collate information on practitioner and patient experiences, challenges and facilitators, and examples of best practice to inform the development of an online toolkit and training package.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Methods</jats:title><jats:p>Guided discussions were carried out with 44 practitioners, 7 patients and 2 carers from five health and social care organisations in South West England, and analysed thematically.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Results</jats:title><jats:p>Practitioners and patients had positive experiences of telerehabilitation and were optimistic about its future use. Recognized benefits for people with physical disabilities included greater flexibility, reduced travel and fatigue, having appointments in a familiar environment and ease of involving family members. Challenges encountered were: technological (usability issues, access to technology and digital skills); difficulties seeing or hearing patients; the lack of ‘hands‐on’ care; and safety concerns. Facilitators were supported by colleagues or digital champions, and family members or carers who could assist patients during their appointments. Key themes in best practice were: person‐centred and tailored care; clear and open communication and observation and preparation and planning. Practitioners shared tips for remote physical assessments; for example, making use of patient‐reported outcomes, and asking patients to wear bright and contrasting coloured clothing to make it easier to see movement.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Conclusion</jats:title><jats:p>Telerehabilitation holds promise in health and social care, but it is necessary to share good practice to ensure it is safe, effective and accessible. We collated information and recommendations that informed the content of the Telerehab Toolkit (<jats:ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xlink:href="https://www.plymouth.ac.uk/research/telerehab">https://www.plymouth.ac.uk/research/telerehab</jats:ext-link>), a practical resource for practitioners, patients and carers, with a focus on remote assessment and management of physical disabilities and movement impairment.</jats:p></jats:sec>

dc.format.extent1084-1095
dc.format.mediumPrint-Electronic
dc.languageen
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherWiley
dc.subjectmovement impairment
dc.subjectphysical disabilities
dc.subjectremote consultations
dc.subjecttelerehabilitation
dc.titleTelerehabilitation for physical disabilities and movement impairment: A service evaluation in South West England
dc.typejournal-article
dc.typeArticle
plymouth.author-urlhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35437833
plymouth.issue6
plymouth.volume28
plymouth.publisher-urlhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jep.13689
plymouth.publication-statusPublished
plymouth.journalJournal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/jep.13689
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health/School of Health Professions
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health/School of Nursing and Midwifery
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA/UoA03 Allied Health Professions, Dentistry, Nursing and Pharmacy
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/FoH - Applied Parkinson's Research
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/Institute of Health and Community
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/Plymouth Institute of Health and Care Research (PIHR)
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role/Academics
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role/Researchers in ResearchFish submission
dc.publisher.placeEngland
dcterms.dateAccepted2022-04-06
dc.rights.embargodate2022-4-30
dc.identifier.eissn1365-2753
dc.rights.embargoperiodNot known
rioxxterms.versionofrecord10.1111/jep.13689
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttp://www.rioxx.net/licenses/all-rights-reserved
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2022-04-19
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Review


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


All items in PEARL are protected by copyright law.
Author manuscripts deposited to comply with open access mandates are made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the details provided on the item record or document. In the absence of an open licence (e.g. Creative Commons), permissions for further reuse of content should be sought from the publisher or author.
Theme by 
Atmire NV