Introduction Physical activity levels of children with disabilities are low, as these children and their parents face a wide variety of both personal and environmental barriers. Behavior change techniques support pediatric physical therapists to address these barriers together with parents and children. We developed the What Moves You?! intervention Toolkit (WMY Toolkit) filled with behavioral change tools for use in pediatric physical therapy practice. Objective To evaluate the feasibility of using the WMY Toolkit in daily pediatric physical therapy practice. Methods We conducted a feasibility study with a qualitative approach using semi-structured interviews with pediatric physical therapists (n = 11). After one day of training, the pediatric physical therapists used the WMY Toolkit for a period of 9 weeks, when facilitating physical activity in children with disabilities. We analyzed the transcripts using an inductive thematic analysis followed by a deductive analysis using a feasibility framework. Results For acceptability, pediatric physical therapists found that the toolkit facilitated conversation about physical activity in a creative and playful manner. The working mechanisms identified were in line with the intended working mechanisms during development of the WMY Toolkit, such as focusing on problem solving, self-efficacy and independence. For demand, the pediatric physical therapists mentioned that they were able to use the WMY Toolkit in children with and without disabilities with a broad range of physical activity goals. For implementation, education is important as pediatric physical therapists expressed the need to have sufficient knowledge and to feel confident using the toolkit. For practicality, pediatric physical therapists were positive about the ease of which tools could be adapted for individual children. Some of the design and materials of the toolkit needed attention due to fragility and hygiene. Conclusion The WMY Toolkit is a promising and innovative way to integrate behavior change techniques into pediatric physical therapy practice.
LINK
Background: Osteoarthritis is a major public health concern. Despite existing evidence-based treatment options, the health care situation remains unsatisfactory. Digital care options, especially when combined with in-person sessions, seem to be promising. Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate the needs, preconditions, barriers, and facilitators of blended physical therapy for osteoarthritis. Methods: This Delphi study consisted of interviews, an online questionnaire, and focus groups. Participants were physical therapists, patients with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis with or without experience in digital care, and stakeholders of the health care system. In the first phase, interviews were conducted with patients and physical therapists. The interview guide was based on the Consolidated Framework For Implementation Research. The interviews focused on experiences with digital and blended care. Furthermore, needs, facilitators, and barriers were discussed. In the second phase, an online questionnaire and focus groups served the process to confirm the needs and collect preconditions. The online questionnaire contained statements drawn by the results of the interviews. Patients and physical therapists were invited to complete the questionnaire and participate in one of the three focus groups including (1) patients; (2) physical therapists; and (3) a patient, a physical therapist, and stakeholders from the health care system. The focus groups were used to determine concordance with the results of the interviews and the online questionnaire. Results: Nine physical therapists, seven patients, and six stakeholders confirmed that an increase of acceptance of the digital care part by physical therapists and patients is crucial. One of the most frequently mentioned facilitators was conducting regular in-person sessions. Physical therapists and patients concluded that blended physical therapy must be tailored to the patients' needs. Participants of the last focus group stated that the reimbursement of blended physical therapy needs to be clarified. Conclusions: Most importantly, it is necessary to strengthen the acceptance of patients and physical therapists toward digital care. Overall, fo
LINK
Background and Objective: To develop a health care value framework for physical therapy primary health care organizations including a definition. Method: A scoping review was performed. First, relevant studies were identified in 4 databases (n = 74). Independent reviewers selected eligible studies. Numerical and thematic analyses were performed to draft a preliminary framework including a definition. Next, the feasibility of the framework and definition was explored by physical therapy primary health care organization experts. Results: Numerical and thematic data on health care quality and context-specific performance resulted in a health care value framework for physical therapy primary health care organizations—including a definition of health care value, namely “to continuously attain physical therapy primary health care organization-centered outcomes in coherence with patient- and stakeholder-centered outcomes, leveraged by an organization’s capacity for change.” Conclusion: Prior literature mainly discussed health care quality and context-specific performance for primary health care organizations separately. The current study met the need for a value-based framework, feasible for physical therapy primary health care organizations, which are for a large part micro or small. It also solves the omissions of incoherent literature and existing frameworks on continuous health care quality and context-specific performance. Future research is recommended on longitudinal exploration of the HV (health care value) framework.
DOCUMENT
Background: Home-based exercise is an important part of physical therapy treatment for patients with low back pain. However, treatment effectiveness depends heavily on patient adherence to home-based exercise recommendations. Smartphone apps designed to support home-based exercise have the potential to support adherence to exercise recommendations and possibly improve treatment effects. A better understanding of patient perspectives regarding the use of smartphone apps to support home-based exercise during physical therapy treatment can assist physical therapists with optimal use and implementation of these apps in clinical practice. Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate patient perspectives on the acceptability, satisfaction, and performance of a smartphone app to support home-based exercise following recommendations from a physical therapist. Methods: Using an interpretivist phenomenology approach, 9 patients (4 males and 5 females; aged 20-71 years) with nonspecific low back pain recruited from 2 primary care physical therapy practices were interviewed within 2 weeks after treatment ended. An interview guide was used for the interviews to ensure that different aspects of the patients' perspectives were discussed. The Physitrack smartphone app was used to support home-based exercise as part of treatment for all patients. Data were analyzed using the "Framework Method" to assist with interpretation of the data. Results: Data analysis revealed 11 categories distributed among the 3 themes "acceptability," "satisfaction," and "performance." Patients were willing to accept the app as part of treatment when it was easy to use, when it benefited the patient, and when the physical therapist instructed the patient in its use. Satisfaction with the app was determined by users' perceived support from the app when exercising at home and the perceived increase in adherence. The video and text instructions, reminder functions, and self-monitor functions were considered the most important aspects for performance during treatment. The patients did not view the Physitrack app as a replacement for the physical therapist and relied on their therapist for instructions and support when needed. Conclusions: Patients who use an app to support home-based exercise as part of treatment are accepting of the app when it is easy to use, when it benefits the patient, and when the therapist instructs the patient in its use. Physical therapists using an app to support home-based exercise can use the findings from this study to effectively support their patients when exercising at home during treatment.
LINK
Background: Home-based exercise is an important part of physical therapy treatment for patients with low back pain. However, treatment effectiveness depends heavily on patient adherence to home-based exercise recommendations. Smartphone apps designed to support home-based exercise have the potential to support adherence to exercise recommendations and possibly improve treatment effects. A better understanding of patient perspectives regarding the use of smartphone apps to support home-based exercise during physical therapy treatment can assist physical therapists with optimal use and implementation of these apps in clinical practice. Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate patient perspectives on the acceptability, satisfaction, and performance of a smartphone app to support home-based exercise following recommendations from a physical therapist. Methods: Using an interpretivist phenomenology approach, 9 patients (4 males and 5 females; aged 20-71 years) with nonspecific low back pain recruited from 2 primary care physical therapy practices were interviewed within 2 weeks after treatment ended. An interview guide was used for the interviews to ensure that different aspects of the patients’ perspectives were discussed. The Physitrack smartphone app was used to support home-based exercise as part of treatment for all patients. Data were analyzed using the “Framework Method” to assist with interpretation of the data. Results: Data analysis revealed 11 categories distributed among the 3 themes “acceptability,” “satisfaction,” and “performance.” Patients were willing to accept the app as part of treatment when it was easy to use, when it benefited the patient, and when the physical therapist instructed the patient in its use. Satisfaction with the app was determined by users’ perceived support from the app when exercising at home and the perceived increase in adherence. The video and text instructions, reminder functions, and self-monitor functions were considered the most important aspects for performance during treatment. The patients did not view the Physitrack app as a replacement for the physical therapist and relied on their therapist for instructions and support when needed. Conclusions: Patients who use an app to support home-based exercise as part of treatment are accepting of the app when it is easy to use, when it benefits the patient, and when the therapist instructs the patient in its use. Physical therapists using an app to support home-based exercise can use the findings from this study to effectively support their patients when exercising at home during treatment.
MULTIFILE
In order to overcome cancer-related problems and to improve quality of life, an intensive multi-focus rehabilitation programme for cancer patients was developed. We hypothesised that this six-week intensive rehabilitation programme would result in physiological improvements and improvement in quality of life. Thirty-four patients with cancer-related physical and psychosocial problems were the subjects of a prospective observational study. A six-week intensive multi-focus rehabilitation programme consisted of four components: individual exercise, sports, psycho-education, and information. Measurements (symptom-limited bicycle ergometry performance, muscle force and quality of life [RAND-36, RSCL, MFI]) were performed before (T0) and after six weeks of rehabilitation (T1). After the intensive rehabilitation programme, statistically significant improvements were found in symptom-limited bicycle ergometry performance, muscle force, and several domains of the RAND-36, RSCL and MFI. The six-week intensive multi-focus rehabilitation programme had immediate beneficial effects on physiological variables, on quality of life and on fatigue.
DOCUMENT
BACKGROUND: Research suggests that cancer rehabilitation reduces fatigue in survivors of cancer. To date, it is unclear what type of rehabilitation is most beneficial.OBJECTIVE: This randomized controlled trial compared the effect on cancer-related fatigue of physical training combined with cognitive behavioral therapy with physical training alone and with no intervention.DESIGN: In this multicenter randomized controlled trial, 147 survivors of cancer were randomly assigned to a group that received physical training combined with cognitive-behavioral therapy (PT+CBT group, n=76) or to a group that received physical training alone (PT group, n=71). In addition, a nonintervention control group (WLC group) consisting of 62 survivors of cancer who were on the waiting lists of rehabilitation centers elsewhere was included.SETTING: The study was conducted at 4 rehabilitation centers in the Netherlands.PATIENTS: All patients were survivors of cancer.INTERVENTION: Physical training consisting of 2 hours of individual training and group sports took place twice weekly, and cognitive-behavioral therapy took place once weekly for 2 hours.MEASUREMENTS: Fatigue was assessed with the Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory before and immediately after intervention (12 weeks after enrollment). The WLC group completed questionnaires at the same time points.RESULTS: Baseline fatigue did not differ significantly among the 3 groups. Over time, levels of fatigue significantly decreased in all domains in all groups, except in mental fatigue in the WLC group. Analyses of variance of postintervention fatigue showed statistically significant group effects on general fatigue, on physical and mental fatigue, and on reduced activation but not on reduced motivation. Compared with the WLC group, the PT group reported significantly greater decline in 4 domains of fatigue, whereas the PT+CBT group reported significantly greater decline in physical fatigue only. No significant differences in decline in fatigue were found between the PT+CBT and PT groups.CONCLUSIONS: Physical training combined with cognitive-behavioral therapy and physical training alone had significant and beneficial effects on fatigue compared with no intervention. Physical training was equally effective as or more effective than physical training combined with cognitive-behavioral therapy in reducing cancer-related fatigue, suggesting that cognitive-behavioral therapy did not have additional beneficial effects beyond the benefits of physical training.
DOCUMENT
Parental involvement is a crucial force in children’s development, learning and success at school and in life [1]. Participation, defined by the World Health Organization as ‘a person’s involvement in life situations’ [2] for children means involvement in everyday activities, such as recreational, leisure, school and household activities [3]. Several authors use the term social participation emphasising the importance of engagement in social situations [4, 5]. Children’s participation in daily life is vital for healthy development, social and physical competencies, social-emotional well-being, sense of meaning and purpose in life [6]. Through participation in different social contexts, children gather the knowledge and skills needed to interact, play, work, and live with other people [4, 7, 8]. Unfortunately, research shows that children with a physical disability are at risk of lower participation in everyday activities [9]; they participate less frequently in almost all activities compared with children without physical disabilities [10, 11], have fewer friends and often feel socially isolated [12-14]. Parents, in particular, positively influence the participation of their children with a physical disability at school, at home and in the community [15]. They undertake many actions to improve their child’s participation in daily life [15, 16]. However, little information is available about what parents of children with a physical disability do to enable their child’s participation, what they come across and what kind of needs they have. The overall aim of this thesis was to investigate parents’ actions, challenges, and needs while enhancing the participation of their school-aged child with a physical disability. In order to achieve this aim, two steps have been made. In the first step, the literature has been examined to explore the topic of this thesis (actions, challenges and needs) and to clarify definitions for the concepts of participation and social participation. Second, for the purposes of giving breadth and depth of understanding of the topic of this thesis a mixed methods approach using three different empirical research methods [17-19], was applied to gather information from parents regarding their actions, challenges and needs.
DOCUMENT
Objective: To investigate the effects of a school-based once-a-week sports program on physical fitness, physical activity, and cardiometabolic health in children and adolescents with a physical disability. Methods: This controlled clinical trial included 71 children and adolescents from four schools for special education [mean age 13.7 (2.9) years, range 8–19, 55% boys]. Participants had various chronic health conditions including cerebral palsy (37%), other neuromuscular (44%), metabolic (8%), musculoskeletal (7%), and cardiovascular (4%) disorders. Before recruitment and based on the presence of school-based sports, schools were assigned as sport or control group. School-based sports were initiated and provided by motivated experienced physical educators. The sport group (n = 31) participated in a once-a-week school-based sports program for 6 months, which included team sports. The control group (n = 40) followed the regular curriculum. Anaerobic performance was assessed by the Muscle Power Sprint Test. Secondary outcome measures included aerobic performance, VO2 peak, strength, physical activity, blood pressure, arterial stiffness, body composition, and the metabolic profile. Results: A significant improvement of 16% in favor of the sport group was found for anaerobic performance (p = 0.003). In addition, the sport group lost 2.8% more fat mass compared to the control group (p = 0.007). No changes were found for aerobic performance, VO2 peak, physical activity, blood pressure, arterial stiffness, and the metabolic profile. Conclusion: Anaerobic performance and fat mass improved following a school-based sports program. These effects are promising for long-term fitness and health promotion, because sports sessions at school eliminate certain barriers for sports participation and adding a once-a-week sports session showed already positive effects for 6 months.
DOCUMENT
Background: Despite the growing importance of eHealth it is not consistently embedded in the curricula of functional exercise and physical therapy education. Insight in barriers and facilitators for embedding eHealth in education is required for the development of tailored strategies to implement eHealth in curricula. This study aims to identify barriers/facilitators perceived by teachers and students of functional exercise/physical therapy for uptake of eHealth in education. Methods: A qualitative study including six focus groups (two with teachers/four with students) was conducted to identify barriers/facilitators. Focus groups were audiotaped and transcribed in full. Reported barriers and facilitators were identified, grouped and classified using a generally accepted framework for implementation including the following categories: innovation, individual teacher/student, social context, organizational context and political and economic factors. Results: Teachers (n = 11) and students (n = 24) of functional exercise/physical therapy faculties of two universities of applied sciences in the Netherlands participated in the focus groups. A total of 109 barriers/facilitators were identified during the focus groups. Most related to the Innovation category (n = 26), followed by the individual teacher (n = 22) and the organization (n = 20). Teachers and students identified similar barriers/facilitators for uptake of eHealth in curricula: e.g. unclear concept of eHealth, lack of quality and evidence for eHealth, (lack of) capabilities of students/teachers on how to use eHealth, negative/positive attitude of students/teachers towards eHealth. Conclusion: The successful uptake of eHealth in the curriculum of functional exercise/physical therapists needs a systematic multi-facetted approach considering the barriers and facilitators for uptake identified from the perspective of teachers and students. A relatively large amount of the identified barriers and facilitators were overlapping between teachers and students. Starting points for developing effective implementation strategies can potentially be found in those overlapping barriers and facilitators.
MULTIFILE
