Search

Appropriate wheelchair provision is necessary for addressing participation barriers experienced by individuals with mobility impairments. Health care professionals involved in the wheelchair service provision process require a specific set of skills and knowledge to enable wheelchair use that meets individual posture, mobility and daily living requirements. However, inconsistencies exist in academic programmes globally about providing comprehensive education and training programmes. The planned scoping review aims to review and synthesize the global literature on wheelchair service provision education for healthcare professional students, healthcare personnel and educators offered by universities, organizations and industries. This scoping review will be guided by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodological framework. Comprehensive literature searches will be conducted on various global electronic databases on health to seek out how wheelchair service provision education is organized, integrated, implemented and evaluated. Two independent reviewers will perform eligibility decisions and key data extractions. Data from selected studies will be extracted and analysed using conventional content analysis. Information related to wheelchair service provision education including curriculum development, content, teaching methods, evaluation and models of integration will be synthesized. The planned scoping review will be the first to examine all aspects of wheelchair service provision education across professionals, settings and countries. We anticipate that results will inform the content of a Wheelchair Educators' Package, and if appropriate, a follow-up systematic review. An article reporting the results of the scoping review will be submitted for publication to a scientific journal. A comprehensive examination of wheelchair service provision education could help develop strategies to address the unmet need for wheelchair services globally. Findings for this review will facilitate the planning and development of an evidence-based education package that could bridge the existing knowledge gaps related to safe and effective wheelchair service provision among health professionals involved. This review will also inform the potential barriers and enablers for effective integration and implementation of wheelchair service provision education worldwide. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This review aimed to collate and summarize available research literature about wheelchair service provision education available to healthcare professional students, healthcare personnel and educators across low- to high-resourced settings. The Joanna Briggs Institute methodological steps for scoping reviews were followed. Included studies were mainly sourced from Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, Academic Search Complete and ProQuest. Independent title, abstract and full-text screening with defined inclusion and exclusion criteria was performed. All screening and extraction were performed independently by two authors. A thematic approach was used to synthesize results. Data extracted from included studies were charted according to a template that we created. The study quality was also appraised. A total of 25 articles were included (11, 36% from high-income settings) with 12 (48%) observational studies and 13 (52%) experimental studies. The literature addressed three main topics: (1) assessing wheelchair service provision knowledge, (2) implementing training interventions using in-person, online and/or hybrid learning approaches and (3) describing current wheelchair service provision education globally. The most frequently reported training programs used were the Wheelchair Skills Program and the World Health Organization Wheelchair Service Training Package – Basic Level. Limited information has been published about the integration of wheelchair content into the curricula of professional rehabilitation programs. Efforts to build international partnerships, improve the quality and currency of training programs and build resources that can assist educators in the integration of wheelchair-related content into professional rehabilitation programs should be prioritized. This is the first review that examined and synthesized the current state of wheelchair service provision education for rehabilitation students and personnel across low- to high-income countries. Findings from this review indicate that there is limited information about the integration of wheelchair-related content into professional rehabilitation programs. Efforts to build international partnerships, standardize wheelchair service provision content and evaluation and integrate training into professional rehabilitation programs worldwide should be prioritized. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Despite the presence of both national and regional clinical practical guidelines (CPGs) in Sweden, no previous studies have investigated the quality of CPGs or the level of agreement between national and regional CPGs., Objectives: This study aimed to assess the quality of national CPGs recommending prosthetics and orthotics (P&O) and quantify the agreement between national and regional CPGs in Sweden., Study Design: Literature Review., Methods: National and regional CPGs were identified in public databases and by surveyed local nurse practitioners. Quality of the national guidelines was assessed by using AGREE II. Agreement between recommendations in the national and regional CPGs was quantified on a 4-grade rating scale ("similar," "partially similar," "not similar/not present," and "different")., Results: Of 18 national CPGs, 3 CPGs (CPGs of Diabetes, Musculoskeletal disorders, and Stroke) had 9 recommendations related to P&O. The Musculoskeletal disorders and Stroke CPGs had quality scores .60% in all domains, and the Diabetes CPG had scores .60% in 5 of 6 domains according to AGREE II. Seven regional CPGs for P&O treatment were identified. Three national recommendations (in Diabetes CPGs) showed "similar" content for all regions, and 2 national recommendations (in Diabetes CPGs) showed "not similar" content for all regions. The remaining recommendations (Diabetes, Musculoskeletal disorders, and Stroke CPGs) had varying agreement with regional CPGs., Conclusions: There is a limited number of national recommendations for treatment within P&O. There was variation in the agreement of P&O-related recommendations in national and regional CPGs, which might lead to unequal care throughout the national healthcare system., (Copyright © 2023 International Society for Prosthetics and Orthotics.)

Problems with balance, postural control, and fear of falling are highly prevalent in lower limb prosthesis users, with much research conducted to understand these issues. The variety of tools used to assess these concepts presents a challenge when interpreting research outcomes. This systematic review aimed to provide a synthesis of quantifiable methods used in the evaluation of balance, postural control, and fear of falling in lower limb prosthesis users with an amputation level at or proximal to the ankle joint. A systematic search was conducted in CINAHL, Medline, AMED, Cochrane, AgeLine, Scopus, Web of Science, Proquest, PsycINFO, PsycArticles, and PubPsych databases followed by additional manual searching via reference lists in the reviewed articles databases. Included articles used quantitative measure of balance or postural control as one of the dependent variables, lower limb prosthesis users as a sample group, and were published in a peer-reviewed journal in English. Relevant assessment questions were created by the investigators to rate the assessment methods used in the individual studies. Descriptive and summary statistics are used to synthesize the results. The search yielded (n = 187) articles assessing balance or postural control (n = 5487 persons in total) and (n = 66) articles assessing fear of falling or balance confidence (n = 7325 persons in total). The most used test to measure balance was the Berg Balance Scale and the most used test to measure fear of falling was the Activities-specific Balance Confidence scale. A large number of studies did not present if the chosen methods were valid and reliable for the lower limb prosthesis users. Among study limitations, small sample size was common., (Copyright © 2023 International Society for Prosthetics and Orthotics.)

Background: Non-removable knee-high devices are the gold-standard offloading treatments to heal plantar diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs). These devices are underused in practice for a variety of reasons. Recommending these devices for all patients, regardless of their circumstances and preferences influencing their ability to tolerate the devices, does not seem a fruitful approach., Purpose: The aim of this article is to explore the potential implications of a more personalized approach to offloading DFUs and suggest avenues for future research and development., Methods: Non-removable knee-high devices effectively heal plantar DFUs by reducing plantar pressure and shear at the DFU, reducing weight-bearing activity and enforcing high adherence. We propose that future offloading devices should be developed that aim to optimize these mechanisms according to each individual's needs. We suggest three different approaches may be developed to achieve such personalized offloading treatment. First, we suggest modular devices, where different mechanical features (rocker-bottom sole, knee-high cast walls/struts, etc.) can be added or removed from the device to accommodate different patients' needs and the evolving needs of the patient throughout the treatment period. Second, advanced manufacturing techniques and novel materials could be used to personalize the design of their devices, thereby improving common hindrances to their use, such as devices being heavy, bulky, and hot. Third, sensors could be used to provide real-time feedback to patients and clinicians on plantar pressures, shear, weight-bearing activity, and adherence., Conclusions: By the use of these approaches, we could provide patients with personalized devices to optimize plantar tissue stress, thereby improving clinical outcomes.