Search

Background: People with an acquired brain injury (ABI) find it challenging to use social media due to changes in their cognition and communication skills. Using social media can provide opportunities for positive connection, but there is a lack of interventions specifically designed to support safe and successful social media use after ABI. Aims: To investigate the outcomes of completing a social media skills intervention and identify barriers and facilitators for future implementation. Methods & Procedures: The study used a mixed‐methods, pre‐post‐intervention design. A total of 17 adults with an ABI were recruited. Participants completed an intervention that included a short self‐guided course about social media skills (social‐ABI‐lity course), and then participated in a private, moderated Facebook group over a 12‐week period (social‐ABI‐lity Facebook group). Data were collected over this period through observation of group activity and weekly surveys. They were also collected on social media use and quality of life at pre‐intervention, post‐intervention and after 3 months. Participants provided feedback on the experience of participating in the programme via a post‐intervention interview. Outcomes & Results: At post‐intervention, there were significant improvements in confidence in using Facebook (p = 0.002) and enjoyment of using Facebook to connect with others (p = 0.013). There was no significant change in reported quality of life, although participants described the multiple benefits of connection they perceived from involvement in the group. Observational data and feedback interviews were informative about the feasibility and acceptability of the intervention. Conclusions & Implications: This pilot study provided preliminary evidence that an intervention comprising a short, self‐guided training course and a private, moderated Facebook group improved outcomes for people with ABI. Key recommendations for future implementation include embedding active peer moderators within groups and taking an individualized approach to delivery of the intervention. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject: Research has documented the challenges that people with ABI experience in using social media, and the difficulty for rehabilitation clinicians in providing appropriate support in this field. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: This pilot study reports the outcomes of people with ABI completing a short, self‐guided social media skills course and participating in a private, moderated Facebook group. After the intervention, participants reported significantly increased confidence and enjoyment in using Facebook, described the benefits of connection found in the groups, and suggested potential improvements for future implementation. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: With the growing use of social media for connection and participation, there is a professional obligation to address social media communication skills in cognitive–communication rehabilitation for people with ABI. The findings of this study will inform interventions and future research to assist people with ABI to build their social media skills for communication, social support and a sense of connection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Healthcare professionals without specialist training in communication disorders may not know how to identify and support patients with communication disabilities during mental capacity assessments. To meet this need, a novel communication screening tool was developed and tested as part of a mental capacity assessment support toolkit. Aims: To provide an initial evaluation of the communication screening tool's usability, interrater reliability and criterion validity. Methods & Procedures: A prototype communication screening tool was developed iteratively using co‐production and user‐centred design principles. A mixed‐methods case series design was used to explore how multidisciplinary healthcare professionals used the tool to test patients in acute hospital and intermediate care settings. Usability data were collected in an electronic survey and from a documentary analysis. Screening test outcomes obtained by pairs of professionals were compared to measure the tool's interrater reliability. Outcomes obtained by professionals were compared with the outcomes of a speech and language therapist's communication assessment to measure criterion validity. Quantitative data were analysed using frequency counts and inferential statistics. Qualitative data were analysed using framework analysis. Outcomes & Results: A total of 21 professionals, including physicians, nurses, occupational therapists, physiotherapists, and speech and language therapists, and 17 patients with diagnoses of stroke or cognitive impairment took part. Professionals reported they found the tool easy to use, useful and that its use increased their understanding of communication support methods and the speech and language therapist role in relation to mental capacity assessment. However, not all used it consistently or accurately. Professionals reported they chose not to use the tool when they perceived patients' communication to be intact. Four of eight patients with a diagnosis of dementia or memory impairment, who professionals elected not to screen, were found to have significant communication needs. Screening outcome data for nine patients suggest the tool's interrater reliability is currently moderate, whilst its criterion validity is poor. Conclusions & Implications: This study highlights that non‐speech and language therapist health professionals have difficulty identifying and screening for communication difficulties. This confirms existing evidence that people with communication disabilities may not receive the decision‐making support they require during mental capacity assessments when speech and language therapists are not involved. Greater understanding of health professionals' thought processes regarding communication is required to further develop this unique communication screening tool so that it can effectively enable healthcare professionals to identify and use communicative adaptations to support decision‐making. What this paper addsWhat is already known on this subjectLimited previous research suggests that assessing the mental capacity of people with communication disabilities is complex. Practice needs to be improved to ensure this group is adequately supported to make decisions, in line with legal requirements.What this paper adds to existing knowledgeThis paper describes the development and testing of a novel communication screening tool for use by healthcare professionals preparing to undertake mental capacity assessments. It increases our understanding of how healthcare professionals without specialist training understand communication disability and the role of the speech and language therapist in relation to mental capacity assessment.What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?Healthcare professionals without specialist training require support to understand and respond to the needs of people with communication disabilities during mental capacity assessments. With further development and testing, in response to initial evaluation, this novel communication screening tool may be able to provide this support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]