Search

Background: Subjective well‐being (SWB) and quality of life (QOL) are intricately related constructs. Recent research shows both constructs share some facets, but are distinct entities. It is unclear, both internationally and in the Netherlands, if and how SLTs address SWB in clinical practice. The current study was set up to explore Dutch SLTs' perceptions of SWB in relation to the management of people with aphasia. Aims: To describe how Dutch SLTs, working with people with aphasia in a private practice or a healthcare setting, address patient's SWB during diagnosis and treatment, and to identify barriers and facilitators they experience when addressing SWB. Methods & Procedures: A qualitative research design with a phenomenological approach was used. SLTs from private practices and healthcare settings were invited to participate in individual interviews and a focus group. The data were analysed thematically using a combination of inductive and deductive methods. Outcomes & Results: Eight SLTs participated in the study. The SLTs' experiences were captured in four themes that emerged from the data: (1) SWB is a multifaceted concept and depends on patient‐specific factors: premorbid factors, life priorities and time post‐stroke; (2) SLTs experience more responsibility for patients' SWB than their profession allows; (3) collaboration between SLTs and patients, patients' network and other healthcare professionals is required to address SWB during diagnosis and treatment; and (4) misinterpretations are inevitable when SLTs or the patients' network address patients' SWB. Conclusions & Implications: The results showed that SLTs feel responsible for addressing SWB in the management of people with aphasia. Their perception of the concept of SWB is similar to the definition used in the literature and is multifaceted. They feel responsible for the part of SWB that is related to communicative functioning, but less so for the more heuristic aspects of SWB. This is related to their experienced limitation of influence on SWB, which for some leaves them feeling out of depth and uncertain about boundaries between professionals. Addressing SWB in a multidisciplinary team is therefore considered important in order to adequately and fully capture someone's SWB and reduce to clinicians' experienced burden and responsibility. What this paper addsWhat is already known on this subjectRecent studies suggest that quality of life measures may lack facets related to subjective well‐being (SWB). Aphasia is likely to impact on SWB of a stroke survivor, but it is unclear if and how SWB is addressed by speech and language therapists in diagnosis, and treatment of Dutch PWA.What this study addsThis study provides insight into the operationalization of SWB in Dutch clinical practice, including barriers SLTs experience when addressing SWB.Clinical implications of this studyMonitoring and influencing SWB of people with aphasia is a complex process, that SLTs consider only possible in multi‐disciplinary teams. Clear guidelines on roles and responsibilities between various disciplines involved are necessary to improve care for people with aphasia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To assist higher education institutions in meeting the challenge of limited student engagement in the implementation of Learning Analytics services, the Questionnaire for Student Expectations of Learning Analytics (SELAQ) was developed. This instrument contains 12 items, which are explained by a purported two‐factor structure of "Ethical and Privacy Expectations" and "Service Feature Expectations." As it stands, however, the SELAQ has only been validated with students from UK university, which is problematic on account of the interest in Learning Analytics extending beyond this context. Thus, the aim of the current work was to assess whether the translated SELAQ can be validated in three contexts (an Estonian, a Spanish, and a Dutch University). The findings show that the model provided acceptable fits in both the Spanish and Dutch samples, but was not supported in the Estonian student sample. In addition, an assessment of local fit is undertaken for each sample, which provides important points that need to be considered in future work. Finally, a general comparison of expectations across contexts is undertaken, which are discussed in relation to the General Data Protection Regulation (2018). Lay Description: What is currently known about the subject matter: Accounting for student expectations allows for a service that is meaningful.SELAQ measures student expectations towards Learning Analytics services.The 12 items of the SELAQ can be explained by a two‐factor structure (Ethical and Privacy Expectations and Service Feature Expectations). What their paper adds to this: Validation of the SELAQ in three contextsA discussion of localized sources of strainAn assessment of measurement quality in each contextA general comparison of student expectations across contexts The implications of study findings for practitioners: SELAQ can be used with Spanish and Dutch students.SELAQ responses provide a much needed input from end‐users in Learning Analytics implementations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background and Purpose: Physiotherapy (PT) and occupational therapy (OT) are key professions providing treatment for the arm after stroke; however, knowledge about the content of these treatments is scant. Detailed data are needed to replicate interventions, evaluate their effective components, and evaluate PT and OT practice. This paper describes PT and OT treatment for the severely affected arm in terms of duration, content according to components and categories of the International Classification of Human Functioning, Disability and Health, and to analyze differences between professions. Methods: Design: This is a retrospective analysis of randomized trial data. Participants: 46 patients after stroke with poor arm motor control recruited from inpatient neurological units from three rehabilitation centers in the Netherlands. Procedure: PTs and OTs recorded duration and content of arm treatment interventions for 8 weeks using a bespoke treatment schedule with 15 International Classification of Human Functioning, Disability and Health categories. Results: PTs and OTs spent on average 4–7 min per treatment session (30 min) on arm treatment. OTs spent significantly more time providing arm treatment and treatment at the activities level than PTs. PTs spent 79% of their arm treatment time on body functions, OTs 41%. OTs spent significantly more time on “moving around using transportation,” “self care,” and “household tasks” categories. Conclusions: Patients after stroke with a severely affected arm and an unfavorable prognosis for arm motor recovery receive little arm‐oriented PT and OT. Therapists spent most arm treatment time on body functions. There was a considerable overlap in the content of PT and OT in 12 of the 15 categories. Results can be generalized only to patients with poor arm motor control and may not represent practice in other countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]