Search

There is an urgent need to develop an international competency and capability framework to support standardization of education and roles in advanced practice physiotherapy (APP). This need arose due to the rapid growth of the APP model of care, implemented out of necessity in the absence of agreement as to the competencies and capabilities or formal education required for the roles. This study explores the views and perceptions of practitioners and key stakeholders on a draft competency and capability framework for advanced practice physiotherapists. The purpose of this study was to: 1) gather feedback from key stakeholders (advanced practice physiotherapists, researchers, and leaders) on a draft competency and capability framework and 2) use that feedback to revise and improve the draft framework. Qualitative study using a series of four multi-national online focus groups. Thematic analysis was conducted according to Braun and Clarke. Sixteen participants from the United Kingdom, Ireland, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand participated in the study. Five themes were generated after data analysis: clinical expert, experienced communicator, strong leader, collaborator, and knowledge creator). A modified competency and capability framework was developed based on feedback from the focus groups and input from subject matter experts (SMEs). This study provides a modified core competency and capability framework comprising 24 competencies grouped under six domains. This study is a step toward international standardization of advanced practice physiotherapy based on a commonly agreed framework for the education and training of advanced practice physiotherapists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patient and public involvement (PPI) is a critical priority in research, policy, academia and advocacy organizations. PPI in dementia research is gaining momentum. However, these efforts are missing in international projects aimed at those living with advanced dementia in long‐term care (LTC) homes. Additional complexities can arise in enacting PPI within the context of integration of a palliative approach to care and experiences around end‐of‐life in (EOL) dementia. The mySupport study involved implementing the Family Carer Decision Support (FCDS) intervention for care partners of those living with advanced dementia in LTC in six countries. Research Design and Objective: An interpretive description study was conducted to explore the perspectives of international researchers from six countries on engaging people with lived experiences of dementia and EOL care in research processes. The findings from this study informed the development of a PPI strategy and a subsequent toolkit for the FCDS intervention. Findings: Thirty‐eight interviews were completed with project researchers: 12 from the United Kingdom, 8 from Canada, 7 from Ireland, 4 each from Italy and The Netherlands and 3 from the Czech Republic. Four broad themes describe international researchers' perspectives on advancing methods of engagement for people with lived experiences of dementia and EOL in international PPI activities: (1) Groundwork to engage in research; (2) planning for research activities is key; (3) focus on meaningful engagement and (4) having foresight for practical issues shaping PPI. Discussion and Implications: International projects that involve PPI can present many sources of challenges. The findings in this study highlight important considerations for foundational work for incorporating PPI in international projects. Learning from world leaders and those with lived experiences in various regions can be insightful and help share tools and resources. Patient or Public Contribution: PPI was envisioned as a critical part of conducting the mySupport study. The findings from this study informed the development of a PPI strategy and an international Strategic Guiding Council that included family carers of those living with advanced dementia in LTC homes in six countries. This manuscript focused on the perspectives of researchers on their engagement with people with lived experiences of dementia and EOL. The perspectives of persons with lived experiences on engaging in the mySupport research study will be reported in a forthcoming manuscript. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Aphasia services are currently faced by increasing evidence for therapy of greater intensity and comprehensiveness. Intensive Comprehensive Aphasia Programs (ICAPs) combine these elements in an evidence-based, time-limited group program. The incorporation of new service delivery models in routine clinical practice is, however, likely to pose challenges for both the service provider and administering clinicians. This program of research aims to identify these challenges from the perspective of aphasia clinicians from six countries and will seek to trial potential solutions. Continual advancements in global communication technologies suggest that solutions will be easily shared and accessed across multiple countries. Aims: To identify the perceived and experienced barriers and facilitators to the implementation of 1) intensive aphasia services, 2) comprehensive aphasia services, and 3) ICAPs, from aphasia clinicians across six countries. Methods and procedures: A qualitative enquiry approach included data from six focus groups (n = 34 participants) in Australia, New Zealand, Canada, United States of America (USA), United Kingdom (UK), and Ireland. A thematic analysis of focus group data was informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Outcomes and results: Five prominent theoretical domains from the TDF influenced the implementation of all three aphasia service types across participating countries: environmental context and resources, beliefs about consequences, social/professional role and identity, skills, and knowledge. Four overarching themes assisted the identification and explanation of the key barriers and facilitators: 1. Collaboration, joint initiatives and partnerships, 2. Advocacy, the promotion of aphasia services and evidence-based practice, 3. Innovation, the ability to problem solve challenges, and 4. Culture, the influence of underlying values. Conclusions: The results of this study will inform the development of a theoretically informed intervention to improve health services' adherence to aphasia best practice recommendations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]