Why the uptake of eRehabilitation programs in stroke care is so difficult—a focus group study in the Netherlands
Abstract Background The uptake of eRehabilitation programs in stroke care is insufficient, despite the growing availability. The aim of this study was to explore which factors influence the uptake of eRehabilitation in stroke rehabilitation, among stroke patients, informal caregivers, and healthcare...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMC
2018-10-01
|
| Series: | Implementation Science |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13012-018-0827-5 |
| _version_ | 1818109776251322368 |
|---|---|
| author | B. Brouns J. J. L. Meesters M. M. Wentink A. J. de Kloet H. J. Arwert T. P. M. Vliet Vlieland L. W. Boyce L. van Bodegom-Vos |
| author_facet | B. Brouns J. J. L. Meesters M. M. Wentink A. J. de Kloet H. J. Arwert T. P. M. Vliet Vlieland L. W. Boyce L. van Bodegom-Vos |
| author_sort | B. Brouns |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Background The uptake of eRehabilitation programs in stroke care is insufficient, despite the growing availability. The aim of this study was to explore which factors influence the uptake of eRehabilitation in stroke rehabilitation, among stroke patients, informal caregivers, and healthcare professionals. Methods A qualitative focus group study with eight focus groups (6–8 participants per group) was conducted: six with stroke patients/informal caregivers and two with healthcare professionals involved in stroke rehabilitation (rehabilitation physicians, physical therapists, occupational therapists, psychologists, managers). Focus group interviews were audiotaped, transcribed in full, and analyzed by direct content analysis using the implementation model of Grol. Results Thirty-two patients, 15 informal caregivers, and 13 healthcare professionals were included. A total of 14 influencing factors were found, grouped to 5 of the 6 levels of the implementation model of Grol (Innovation, Organizational context, Individual patient, Individual professional, and Economic and political context). Most quotes of patients, informal caregivers, and healthcare professionals were classified to factors at the level of the Innovation (e.g., content, attractiveness, and feasibility of eRehabilitation programs). In addition, for patients, relatively many quotes were classified to factors at the level of the individual patient (e.g., patients characteristics as fatigue and the inability to understand ICT-devices), and for healthcare professionals at the level of the organizational context (e.g., having sufficient time and the fit with existing processes of care). Conclusion Although there was a considerable overlap in reported factors between patients/informal caregivers and healthcare professionals when it concerns eRehabilitation as innovation, its seems that patients/informal caregivers give more emphasis to factors related to the individual patient, whereas healthcare professionals emphasize the importance of factors related to the organizational context. This difference should be considered when developing an implementation strategy for patients and healthcare professionals separately. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-11T02:36:38Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-2a4789a8cc834707afac3c6797079a60 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1748-5908 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-11T02:36:38Z |
| publishDate | 2018-10-01 |
| publisher | BMC |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Implementation Science |
| spelling | doaj.art-2a4789a8cc834707afac3c6797079a602022-12-22T01:23:43ZengBMCImplementation Science1748-59082018-10-0113111110.1186/s13012-018-0827-5Why the uptake of eRehabilitation programs in stroke care is so difficult—a focus group study in the NetherlandsB. Brouns0J. J. L. Meesters1M. M. Wentink2A. J. de Kloet3H. J. Arwert4T. P. M. Vliet Vlieland5L. W. Boyce6L. van Bodegom-Vos7Faculty of Health, Nutrition and Sports, The Hague University for Applied SciencesFaculty of Health, Nutrition and Sports, The Hague University for Applied SciencesFaculty of Health, Nutrition and Sports, The Hague University for Applied SciencesFaculty of Health, Nutrition and Sports, The Hague University for Applied SciencesSophia Rehabilitation CentreSophia Rehabilitation CentreRijnlands Rehabilitation CentreDepartment of Biomedical Data Sciences, Section Medical Decision Making, Leiden University Medical CenterAbstract Background The uptake of eRehabilitation programs in stroke care is insufficient, despite the growing availability. The aim of this study was to explore which factors influence the uptake of eRehabilitation in stroke rehabilitation, among stroke patients, informal caregivers, and healthcare professionals. Methods A qualitative focus group study with eight focus groups (6–8 participants per group) was conducted: six with stroke patients/informal caregivers and two with healthcare professionals involved in stroke rehabilitation (rehabilitation physicians, physical therapists, occupational therapists, psychologists, managers). Focus group interviews were audiotaped, transcribed in full, and analyzed by direct content analysis using the implementation model of Grol. Results Thirty-two patients, 15 informal caregivers, and 13 healthcare professionals were included. A total of 14 influencing factors were found, grouped to 5 of the 6 levels of the implementation model of Grol (Innovation, Organizational context, Individual patient, Individual professional, and Economic and political context). Most quotes of patients, informal caregivers, and healthcare professionals were classified to factors at the level of the Innovation (e.g., content, attractiveness, and feasibility of eRehabilitation programs). In addition, for patients, relatively many quotes were classified to factors at the level of the individual patient (e.g., patients characteristics as fatigue and the inability to understand ICT-devices), and for healthcare professionals at the level of the organizational context (e.g., having sufficient time and the fit with existing processes of care). Conclusion Although there was a considerable overlap in reported factors between patients/informal caregivers and healthcare professionals when it concerns eRehabilitation as innovation, its seems that patients/informal caregivers give more emphasis to factors related to the individual patient, whereas healthcare professionals emphasize the importance of factors related to the organizational context. This difference should be considered when developing an implementation strategy for patients and healthcare professionals separately.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13012-018-0827-5StrokeBarriers and facilitatorsImplementationRehabilitationeHealthFocus groups |
| spellingShingle | B. Brouns J. J. L. Meesters M. M. Wentink A. J. de Kloet H. J. Arwert T. P. M. Vliet Vlieland L. W. Boyce L. van Bodegom-Vos Why the uptake of eRehabilitation programs in stroke care is so difficult—a focus group study in the Netherlands Implementation Science Stroke Barriers and facilitators Implementation Rehabilitation eHealth Focus groups |
| title | Why the uptake of eRehabilitation programs in stroke care is so difficult—a focus group study in the Netherlands |
| title_full | Why the uptake of eRehabilitation programs in stroke care is so difficult—a focus group study in the Netherlands |
| title_fullStr | Why the uptake of eRehabilitation programs in stroke care is so difficult—a focus group study in the Netherlands |
| title_full_unstemmed | Why the uptake of eRehabilitation programs in stroke care is so difficult—a focus group study in the Netherlands |
| title_short | Why the uptake of eRehabilitation programs in stroke care is so difficult—a focus group study in the Netherlands |
| title_sort | why the uptake of erehabilitation programs in stroke care is so difficult a focus group study in the netherlands |
| topic | Stroke Barriers and facilitators Implementation Rehabilitation eHealth Focus groups |
| url | http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13012-018-0827-5 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT bbrouns whytheuptakeoferehabilitationprogramsinstrokecareissodifficultafocusgroupstudyinthenetherlands AT jjlmeesters whytheuptakeoferehabilitationprogramsinstrokecareissodifficultafocusgroupstudyinthenetherlands AT mmwentink whytheuptakeoferehabilitationprogramsinstrokecareissodifficultafocusgroupstudyinthenetherlands AT ajdekloet whytheuptakeoferehabilitationprogramsinstrokecareissodifficultafocusgroupstudyinthenetherlands AT hjarwert whytheuptakeoferehabilitationprogramsinstrokecareissodifficultafocusgroupstudyinthenetherlands AT tpmvlietvlieland whytheuptakeoferehabilitationprogramsinstrokecareissodifficultafocusgroupstudyinthenetherlands AT lwboyce whytheuptakeoferehabilitationprogramsinstrokecareissodifficultafocusgroupstudyinthenetherlands AT lvanbodegomvos whytheuptakeoferehabilitationprogramsinstrokecareissodifficultafocusgroupstudyinthenetherlands |