Backgroundthe efficacy and outcomes of geriatric rehabilitation (GR) have previously been investigated. However, a systematic synthesis of the aspects that are important to patients regarding the quality of GR does not exist.Objectivethe aim of this scoping review was to systematically synthesise the patients’ perspective on the quality of GR.Methodswe followed the Scoping Review framework and gathered literature including a qualitative study design from multiple databases. The inclusion criteria were: a qualitative study design; a geriatric population; that patients had participated in a geriatric rehabilitation programme and that geriatric rehabilitation was assessed by the patient. The results sections of the included studies were analysed using a thematic analysis approach.Resultstwenty articles were included in this review. The main themes identified were: (i) the need for information about the rehabilitation process, (ii) the need for telling one’s story, (iii) the need for support (physical, psychological, social and how to cope with limitations), (iv) the need for shared decision-making and autonomy, (v) the need for a stimulating rehabilitation environment and (vi) the need for rehabilitation at home.Conclusionin this study, we identified the aspects that determine the quality of rehabilitation from the patient’s perspective, which may lead to a more holistic perspective on the quality of GR.
MULTIFILE
Duchenne muscular Dystrophy (DMD) is a progressive degenerative muscle disease, affecting, among others, the upper extremities. Effective hand rehabilitation can improve the hand function of people with DMD. To reach this goal, we first need to gain more insight into the hand cognitive-motor performance of people with DMD. This is the first study employing a systematic analysis on multi-finger, cognitive-motor performance of people with DMD. For this purpose, we propose an active dynamic visuo-motor task. The task employed six visual stimuli, a subset of which was activated at each trial. The stimuli were activated with a frequency of 1, 2, 3 and 4 Hz. Eight healthy participants and three participants with DMD performed the task. Additionally, the healthy participants performed seven sessions, and we assessed the training effects. Task-related cognitive-motor performance was evaluated using information transfer rate (ITR) and perceived workload. Regarding ITR, healthy participants performed significantly better than DMD participants; however, this was more evident for trials involving more than three fingers. Workload showed no difference between the healthy and the DMD groups. Healthy participants significantly improved their performance during training. Our results suggest that hand rehabilitation of people with DMD should consider multi-finger dynamic training. However, additional research with more people with DMD is needed for further generalization of our conclusions.
MULTIFILE
Background. The Treatment Beliefs Questionnaire has been developed to measure patients’ beliefs of necessity of and concerns about rehabilitation. Preliminary evidence suggests that these beliefs may be associated with attendance of rehabilitation. The aim of this study was to translate and adapt the Treatment Beliefs Questionnaire for interdisciplinary pain rehabilitation and to examine the measurement properties of the Dutch translation including the predictive validity for dropout. Methods. The questionnaire was translated in 4 steps: forward translation from English into Dutch, achieving consensus, back translation into English, and pretesting on providers and patients. In order to establish structural validity, internal consistency, construct validity, and predictive validity of the questionnaire, 188 participants referred to a rehabilitation centre for outpatient interdisciplinary pain rehabilitation completed the questionnaire at the baseline. Dropout was measured as the number of patients starting, but not completing the programme. For reproducibility, 51 participants were recruited at another rehabilitation centre to complete the questionnaire at the baseline and one week later. Results. We confirmed the structural validity of the Treatment beliefs Questionnaire in the Dutch translation with three subscales, necessity, concerns, and perceived barriers. internal consistency was acceptable with ordinal alphas ranging from 0.66–0.87. Reproducibility was acceptable with ICC2,1 agreement ranging from 0.67–0.81. Hypotheses testing confirmed construct validity, similar to the original questionnaire. Predictive validity showed the questionnaire was unable to predict dropouts. Conclusion. Cross-cultural translation was successfully completed, and the Dutch Treatment Beliefs Questionnaire demonstrates similar psychometric properties as the original English version.
