Search

AbstractPurpose:Methods:Results:Conclusion:\nIMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONRehabilitation technology (RT) development has grown, however evidence suggests poor uptake by therapists and patients, with many devices abandoned. Successful implementation encompasses both “adoption,” where RT is first utilized, and “sustained use,” wherein RT remains in use over time. This scoping review and qualitative analysis aimed to explore the extent and nature of the relevant evidence base and investigate factors that influence adoption and sustained use of RT in clinical practice, from the perspectives of patients and therapists.A systematic search was conducted to identify qualitative and quantitative articles investigating adoption and/or sustained use of RT. Study characteristics were analyzed quantitatively. Factors influencing adoption and sustained use were analyzed using a two-stage thematic analysis. Stage 1 employed an inductive approach, analyzing data related to RT adoption from review papers. Stage 2 employed an abductive approach, where data related to sustained use from primary research and reviews was mapped to Stage 1 themes and new themes were identified.The review included 42 articles. The majority of articles explored RT adoption. Thematic analysis revealed five themes. Four influenced adoption of RT: (1) “Knowledge” about RT; (2) “Design” of RT; (3) “Circumstances and Characteristics;” and, (4) the “Person-centered” approach. These were confirmed and refined in the sustained use analysis, and a fifth theme, “Healthcare Ecosystem,” was identified.These findings highlight factors influencing adoption and sustained use of RT, providing insights for development and implementation of technology in rehabilitation clinical practice. Further research is needed to identify strategies that facilitate sustained use of RT.The adoption and sustained use of rehabilitation technology is influenced by a range of stakeholders including RT developers, rehabilitation therapists, patients, family members, caregivers, healthcare institutions, and government and regulatory bodies.To support the sustained use of rehabilitation technology, developers should prioritize devices that promote person-centered rehabilitation and patient engagement, and that can be seamlessly integrated into ways of working and daily routines.Knowledge plays a crucial role in the adoption and sustained use RT, and therefore training institutions and professional bodies have a role to play in developing training programs which enhance clinician competency.Government, healthcare and health research funders, and professional and regulatory bodies should foster an ecosystem that recognizes the potential of RTs and supports equitable access to evidenced-based RT.The adoption and sustained use of rehabilitation technology is influenced by a range of stakeholders including RT developers, rehabilitation therapists, patients, family members, caregivers, healthcare institutions, and government and regulatory bodies.To support the sustained use of rehabilitation technology, developers should prioritize devices that promote person-centered rehabilitation and patient engagement, and that can be seamlessly integrated into ways of working and daily routines.Knowledge plays a crucial role in the adoption and sustained use RT, and therefore training institutions and professional bodies have a role to play in developing training programs which enhance clinician competency.Government, healthcare and health research funders, and professional and regulatory bodies should foster an ecosystem that recognizes the potential of RTs and supports equitable access to evidenced-based RT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective Although negative back beliefs are associated with high-intensity low back pain (LBP)/disability, whether they influence incident high-intensity LBP/high disability over the long-term is unknown. This study aimed to investigate whether negative back beliefs were associated with developing high-intensity LBP and/or high disability over 10 years in men. Methods Men with no or low-intensity LBP and/or disability attending the Geelong Osteoporosis Study between 2006 and 2010 were included. Data on age, body mass index, mobility, education, back beliefs (Back Beliefs Questionnaire), LBP and disability (Graded Chronic Pain Scale) were collected between 2006 and 2010. Beliefs, LBP and disability were re-assessed in 2016–2021. Binary logistic regression was used to examine the association between negative back beliefs and incident high-intensity pain and/or high disability, adjusting for age, body mass index, mobility and education. Results At baseline, 705 participants (mean age 53.8 years) had no or low LBP and no or low disability; 441 (62.6%) participants completed a 10-year follow-up. Of these, 37 (8.4%) developed high-intensity pain and/or high disability. In multivariate analyses, participants with more negative back beliefs at baseline were more likely to develop high-intensity pain and/or high disability (odds ratio 1.05; 95% CI: 1.00, 1.11). Developing more negative back beliefs was also associated with incident high-intensity pain and/or high disability (odds ratio 1.20; 95% CI: 1.12, 1.30). Conclusion In a male community-based population, negative beliefs regarding the consequences of LBP were associated with an increased likelihood of developing high-intensity pain and/or high disability. Addressing negative back beliefs in the community may reduce the incidence of high-intensity pain and/or high disability over 10 years in men. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Author(s): Hoa H. Nguyen [sup.1] [sup.2] , Feitong Wu [sup.1] , Wendy H. Oddy [sup.1] , Karen Wills [sup.1] , Sharon L. Brennan-Olsen [sup.3] [sup.4] [sup.5] [sup.6] , Graeme Jones [...], Background/objectives To derive dietary patterns and examine their longitudinal associations with sociodemographic and lifestyle factors in the Tasmanian Older Adult Cohort. Subjects/methods This is a corrected analysis of a retracted paper. We followed 1098 adults aged [greater than or equal to]50 years for 5 years. Dietary intake was assessed using a validated food frequency questionnaire. Baseline dietary patterns were identified using exploratory factor analysis and scores at each time point calculated using the weighted sum score method. Associations of energy-adjusted dietary pattern scores with participant characteristics were assessed using linear mixed-effects models. Results The four dietary patterns identified were: fruit and vegetable (vegetables, potatoes, fruits); animal protein (poultry, red meats, fish); snack (snacks, sweets, nuts); western (meat pies, hamburgers, pizzas). Fruit and vegetable pattern scores were lower in men and current smokers at baseline. Animal protein scores were lower in older and retired people but higher in men and smokers at baseline. The sex difference in animal protein score increased over time (p = 0.012). At baseline, snack score was positively associated with age and physical activity, but lower in men and current smokers. The effect of age on snack score lessened over time (p = 0.035). Western scores were lower in older people but higher in men, current smokers and those living in disadvantaged areas at baseline. The effect of age on western score reduced over time (p = 0.001). Conclusions The higher scores for healthy and/or lower scores for unhealthy patterns in men, smokers, retirees and those experiencing social disadvantage suggest these could be target groups for interventions to improve diet quality in older adults.