Search

Background: Cognitive communication disorder (CCD) following traumatic brain injury (TBI) is well documented and these communication problems impede successful re‐integration into community living. While there is growing evidence for intervention to both detect and treat the impact of these deficits across the rehabilitation continuum, there are barriers to accessing services. Cognitive communication impairments may be missed because the person can talk, and this may mask the subtle but debilitating impact of a CCD. Referral to a speech and language therapist (SLT) may be overlooked or not timely, which prevents the individual accessing evidence‐based interventions. Inadequate treatment provision and an under‐ or overestimation of communication capability can potentially undermine the effectiveness of wider team assessment and intervention. Aims: To report stakeholder views on specialist SLT input for CCD within a multidisciplinary team intervention for a community‐dwelling individual with severe TBI. The investigation explored perspectives on understanding of CCD, on practice and on outcomes, in order to inform professional groups on perceived impacts of the evidence‐to‐practice gap. Methods and Procedures: A semi‐structured interview methodology was employed with 11 stakeholder participants involved in a single case. Data were evaluated using a thematic framework method. Themes were inductively derived from the stakeholder narratives. Outcomes: Stakeholders reported the following outcomes from specialist SLT input for CCD within a collaborative team approach: improved engagement with rehabilitation and support teams, improved health‐related quality of life and well‐being, and increased client participation in community activities of personal relevance. Stakeholders also reported inequities in wider service provision where limitations in professional understanding of CCD and knowledge of best practice recommendations preclude access to specialist SLT services. Conclusions: CCDs are under‐recognised and this can have a devastating effect on people with CCD and on those around them. Stakeholder reports provide evidence for the effectiveness of SLT practice recommendations for the treatment of CCD following TBI. They also provide additional evidence of persisting barriers to accessing treatment. Future research to explore ways to close this evidence‐to‐practice gap is required. What This Paper Adds: What is already known on this subject: Cognitive communication difficulties are a well‐documented consequence of TBI. There is evidence for the effectiveness of person‐centred interventions for CCD across the recovery continuum. International evidence‐based practice recommendations are in place for CCD assessment and management. Barriers to accessing SLT expertise for CCD have previously been reported. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: This investigation explores the views of a diverse group of stakeholders involved in a single case of a community‐dwelling individual with severe TBI. Stakeholders report positive real‐world outcomes from SLT interventions for CCD within a coordinated multidisciplinary rehabilitation team. Stakeholder reports also indicate inequities in wider service provision and CCD knowledge gaps amongst professional groups providing rehabilitation services for people with TBI. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: CCDs are under‐recognised, with devastating effect for people with CCD and those around them. These findings underscore the importance of raising professional awareness of CCD and best practice recommendations, in order to improve access to SLT expertise for people with CCD following TBI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: People with Parkinson's disease (PD) do not always access specialist outpatient services in a timely manner in Ireland. The perspectives of people living with PD, relating to service access, are largely absent in the existing literature. Aim: To explore experiences of PD service access for people living with PD, using a qualitative approach. Methods: Purposive maximum variation sampling was used. Semi‐structured telephone interviews were conducted with 25 service users, including people with PD (n = 22) and supporting carers (n = 3). Informed consent was obtained from all participants. Interviews ranged in duration from 30 to 90 min. Data were managed in NVivo 12 and interpreted inductively using thematic analysis. The researchers were reflexive throughout the research process. The Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research checklist was employed to maximise transparency. Results: The findings highlight several key barriers to and facilitators of equitable and timely service access. Three key themes were identified comprising experiences of PD service access including 'geographical inequity', 'discriminatory practices', and 'public and private system deficits'. Together, these themes illustrate how a two‐tiered and under‐resourced health system lacks capacity, in terms of infrastructure and workforce, to meet PD needs for both public and private patients in Ireland. Conclusions: These findings point to problems for PD care, relating to (i) how the health system is structured, (ii) the under‐provision and under‐resourcing of specialist outpatient PD services, including medical, nursing, and multidisciplinary posts, and (iii) insufficient PD awareness education and training across health settings. The findings also show that telemedicine can provide opportunities for making access to certain aspects of PD care more flexible and equitable, but the feasibility and acceptability of technology‐enabled care must be assessed on an individual basis. Implications for policy, practice and research are discussed. Patient or Public Contribution: The design and conduct of this study were supported by an expert advisory group (EAG) of 10 co‐researchers living with PD. The EAG reviewed the interview schedule and the protocol for this study and provided detailed feedback from their perspective, to improve the methods, including the interview approach. The group also reviewed the findings of the study and contributed their insights on the meaning of the findings, which fed into this paper. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Long Covid is an emerging long‐term condition, with those affected raising concerns about lack of healthcare support. Objective: We conducted a qualitative study to identify facilitators and barriers to healthcare access for people with Long Covid, aiming to enhance our understanding of the specific nature of these barriers and how patient experiences may vary. Setting and Participants: In the context of the Symptoms, Trajectory, Inequalities and Management: Understanding Long‐COVID to Address and Transform Existing Integrated Care Pathways (STIMULATE‐ICP) Delphi study, a nationally distributed online survey was conducted. Eight patients and eight healthcare practitioners (HCP) were interviewed via telephone or video call. Framework analysis, sensitised by the candidacy theory, was used to identify barriers and facilitators over four levels of access to care. Results: Three themes were identified: (i) patients' efforts to navigate emerging pathways for Long Covid, (ii) the patient–HCP interaction and (iii) service resources and structural constraints. Barriers to specialist care included long waiting times, communication gaps across services and a lack of continuity in care. Facilitators included collaborative, patient‐centred approaches, patients' active role in their healthcare and blended approaches for appointments. The perspectives of both patients and HCPs largely aligned. Discussion: The candidacy framework was valuable in understanding the experiences of people with Long Covid seeking access to healthcare. Individuals perceived themselves as eligible for care, but they often encountered obstacles in obtaining the expected level of care or, in some cases, did not receive it at all. Our findings are discussed in the context of the candidacy model through multiple processes of identification, negotiation, permeability and appearances at health services. These themes seem to be especially important for the emerging new pathway model and are relevant to both primary and secondary care. Conclusions: This study highlights that despite these interviews being conducted two years after the start of the COVID‐19 pandemic, people with Long Covid still struggle to access healthcare, emphasising the ongoing need to provide equitable timely healthcare access for people with Long Covid. Patient or Public Contribution: People with Long Covid advised on all stages of this research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Vulvodynia is a poorly understood chronic pain condition characterized by persistent and unexplained pain in the vulva. Given the intimate nature of the pain, partners may play an important role in promoting self-management and help-seeking behaviours among women with vulvodynia. Objectives: The current study aimed to explore the role of partner support in pain experiences and help-seeking behaviours among women with vulvodynia. Design: A qualitative interpretive design was used. Methods: Ten women with vulvodynia (M age = 37.9 years) were interviewed using a semi-structured non-directive topic guide. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Results: Three themes around help-seeking experiences were constructed from the data: (1) 'It's Been a Battle' – Failed by the Healthcare System; (2) 'It's Just the Vulva' – Dismissed by Healthcare Professionals; and (3) 'I Diagnosed Myself' – The Patient Becomes the Expert. Participants described negative help-seeking experiences characterized by long delays to diagnosis, lack of awareness and understanding from healthcare professionals, minimization of symptoms, and having to advocate for and demand care. A further three themes pertaining to partner support were also developed: (1) 'That Person to Listen to You' – Source of Emotional Support; (2) 'Why Don't You Try This?' – Finding Solutions Together; and (3) 'He Forgets that it's Still There' – Vulvodynia is a Foreign Concept. Partners provided emotional support and showed empathy and understanding, and practical support by accompanying women to medical appointments and help with pain management. However, participants felt partners' understanding of vulvodynia was limited and that this impacted their relationships. Conclusions: Findings highlight a lack of continuity of care and multidisciplinary approach to treatment, with help-seeking experiences being mainly negative in this sample. Increasing public awareness of vulvodynia and improving healthcare access is crucial to improving physical and psychological outcomes for this group. Partners can play an important role in supporting people with vulvodynia; however, other outlets of support should be further explored. Plain Language Summary: Understanding How Women with Vulvodynia Seek Help and Get Support from Their Partners Vulvodynia is a condition where women experience persistent and unexplained pain in the vulva. This pain can be quite personal and difficult to deal with. In this study, we wanted to understand how partners of women with vulvodynia help them cope with the pain and seek medical help. We interviewed 10 women with vulvodynia about their experiences of accessing healthcare for their symptoms, and how their partners affected these experiences. Many women faced challenges when seeking medical help, like delays in getting a diagnosis, healthcare professionals not understanding their condition, and their symptoms being downplayed. Women often had to be their own experts and advocate for their care. Partners of these women provided emotional and practical support, like going with them to medical appointments and helping them to manage the pain. However, some women felt their partners did not fully understand vulvodynia, and their worries sometimes strained their relationships. In conclusion, the study showed that there is a need for better healthcare for women with vulvodynia, including more awareness and easier access to treatment. Partners can be supportive, but other forms of support, for example, from friends, family, and other people with experience of vulva pain, should also be explored. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

About 900 youth experiencing homelessness (YEH) reside at an emergency youth shelter (EYS) in Toronto on any given night. Several EYSs offer access to healthcare based on youths' needs, including access to primary care, and mental health and addictions support. However, youth also require healthcare from the broader health system, which is often challenging to navigate and access. Currently, little is known about healthcare coordination efforts between the EYS and health systems for YEH. Using grounded theory methodology, we interviewed 24 stakeholders and concurrently analyzed and compared data to explore pathways to healthcare coordinated for youth who reside at an EYS in Toronto. We also investigated fundamental parts (i.e., norms, resources, regulations, and operations) within the EYS and health systems that influence these pathways to healthcare using thematic analysis. A significant healthcare coordination gap was found between these two systems, typically when youth experience crises, often resulting in a recurring loop of transition and discharge between EYSs and hospitals. Several parts within each system act interdependently in hindering adequate healthcare coordination between the EYS and health systems. Incorporating training for system staff on how to effectively coordinate healthcare and work with homeless populations who have complex health needs, and rethinking information-sharing policies within circles of care are examples of how system parts can be targeted to improve healthcare coordination for YEH. Establishing multidisciplinary healthcare teams specialized to serve the complex needs of YEH may also improve healthcare coordination between systems, and access and quality of healthcare for this population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Physiotherapy Canada is the property of University of Toronto Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)