Search

Purpose: The Rehabilitation Interventions for Individuals with a Spinal Cord Injury in the Community (RIISC) team aimed to develop and evaluate innovative rehabilitation interventions to identify endocrine metabolic disease (EMD) risk, intending to reduce the frequency and severity of EMD related morbidity and mortality among adults living with chronic spinal cord injury or disease (SCI/D). Materials and Methods: An interprovincial team from Ontario and Quebec reviewed available EMD literature and evidence syntheses and completed an inventory of health services, policies and practices in SCI/D care. The review outcomes were combined with expert opinion to create an EMD risk model to inform health service transformation. Results: EMD risk and mortality are highly prevalent among adults with chronic SCI/D. In stark contrast, few rehabilitation interventions target EMD outcomes. The modelled solution proposes: 1) abandoning single-disease paradigms and examining a holistic perspective of the individual's EMD risk, and 2) developing and disseminating practice-based research approaches in outpatient community settings. Conclusions: RIISC model adoption could accelerate EMD care optimization, and ultimately inform the design of large-scale longitudinal pragmatic trials likely to improve health outcomes. Linking the RIISC team activities to economic evaluations and policy deliverables will strengthen the relevance and impact among policymakers, health care providers and patients. IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATION: Living with a spinal cord injury or disease (SCI/D) increases endocrine metabolic disease (EMD) risk. EMD-related outcomes include fracture; type II diabetes; and cardiovascular disease (myocardial infarction, sudden cardiac death and stroke), directly contributing to higher morbidity and mortality. Single-disease paradigms are not the ideal strategy to address multimorbidity contexts experienced in SCI/D. Practice-based research could be an alternative/adjunct to randomized control trials at generating evidence on current and emerging rehabilitation approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The development of a tool to track participation in activity-based therapy (ABT) for people with spinal cord injury or disease (SCI/D) was identified as a priority of the Canadian ABT Community of Practice. The objective of this study was to understand multi-stakeholder perspectives on tracking ABT participation across the continuum of care. Forty-eight individuals from six stakeholder groups (persons living with SCI/D; hospital therapists; community trainers; administrators; researchers; and funders, advocates and policy experts) were recruited to participate in focus group interviews. Participants were asked open-ended questions concerning the importance of and parameters around tracking ABT. Transcripts were analyzed using conventional content analysis. Themes reflected the Who, What, Where, When, Why and How of tracking ABT. Participants described the importance of involving hospital therapists, community trainers and individuals with SCI/D in tracking ABT to capture both subjective and objective parameters across the continuum of care and injury trajectory. Digital tracking tools were favoured, although paper-based versions were regarded as a necessity in some circumstances. Findings highlighted the importance of tracking ABT participation for individuals with SCI/D. The information may guide the development of ABT practice guidelines and support the implementation of ABT in Canada. Tracking the details of activity-based therapy (ABT) sessions and programs across the continuum of care and injury trajectory may provide important information to support the development of ABT practice guidelines and implementation strategies. Tracking objective and subjective parameters are needed to provide a comprehensive description of an ABT session and program. Clinicians and individuals with spinal cord injury or disease (SCI/D) should both be able to track ABT to accommodate all settings and types of data. Digital tracking tools, such as an app, may provide an accessible, versatile and efficient way of tracking ABT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Research partnership approaches are becoming popular within spinal cord injury (SCI) health research system, providing opportunities to explore experiences of and learn from SCI research partnership champions. This study aimed to explore and describe SCI researchers’ and research users’ (RU’) experiences with and reasons for conducting and/or disseminating (health) research in partnership in order to gain more insight into potentially ways to build capacity for and foster change to support research partnerships within a health research system. Methods: Underpinned by a pragmatic perspective, ten semi-structured timeline interviews were conducted with researchers and RU who have experiences with SCI research partnerships. Interviews focused on experiences in participants’ lives that have led them to become a person who conducts and/or disseminates research in partnership. Data were analysed using narrative thematic analysis. Results: We identified three threads from participants’ stories: (1) seeing and valuing different perspectives, (2) inspirational role models, and (3) relational and personal aspect of research partnerships. We identified sub-threads related to experiences that participants draw on how they came to be a person who engage in (health) research partnerships, and sub-threads related to participants’ reasons for engaging in research partnerships. While most sub threads were identified from both researchers’ and RU’ perspectives (eg, partnership successes and failures), some were unique for researchers (morally the right thing to do) or RU (advocating). Conclusion: Using a narrative and pragmatic approach, this study provided a new understanding of SCI researchers’ and RU’ partnership experiences over time. We found that participants’ research partnership experiences and motivations align with components of leadership theories. The findings from this study may be used to inform strategies and policy programs to build capacity for conducting and disseminating (health) research in partnership, within and beyond SCI research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Conducting research in partnership with stakeholders (e.g. policy-makers, practitioners, organisations, patients) is a promising and popular approach to improving the implementation of research findings in policy and practice. This study aimed to identify the principles, strategies, outcomes and impacts reported in different types of reviews of research partnerships in order to obtain a better understanding of the scope of the research partnership literature.Methods: This review of reviews is part of a Coordinated Multicenter Team approach to synthesise the research partnership literature with five conceptually linked literature reviews. The main research question was 'What principles, strategies, outcomes and impacts are reported in different types of research partnership approaches?'. We included articles describing a literature review of research partnerships using a systematic search strategy. We used an adapted version of the Revised Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews tool to assess quality. Nine electronic databases were searched from inception to April 2018. Principles, strategies, outcomes and impacts were extracted from the included reviews and analysed using direct content analysis.Results: We included 86 reviews using terms describing several research partnership approaches (e.g. community-based participatory research, participatory research, integrated knowledge translation). After the analyses, we synthesised 17 overarching principles and 11 overarching strategies and grouped them into one of the following subcategories: relationship between partners; co-production of knowledge; meaningful stakeholder engagement; capacity-building, support and resources; communication process; and ethical issues related to the collaborative research activities. Similarly, we synthesised 20 overarching outcomes and impacts on researchers, stakeholders, the community or society, and the research process.Conclusions: This review of reviews is the first that presents overarching principles, strategies, outcomes and impacts of research partnerships. This review is unique in scope as we synthesised literature across multiple research areas, involving different stakeholder groups. Our findings can be used as a first step to guide the initiation and maintenance of research partnerships and to create a classification system of the key domains of research partnerships, which may improve reporting consistency in the research partnership literature.Trial Registration: This study is registered via Open Science Framework: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/GVR7Y. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose Multidisciplinary management improves complex treatment decision making in cancer care, but its impact for bladder cancer (BC) has not been documented. Although radical cystectomy (RC) currently is viewed as the standard of care for muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC), radiotherapy-based, bladder-sparing trimodal therapy (TMT) that combines transurethral resection of bladder tumor, chemotherapy for radiation sensitization, and external beam radiotherapy has emerged as a valid treatment option. In the absence of randomized studies, this study compared the oncologic outcomes between patients treated with RC or TMT by using a propensity score matched-cohort analysis. Methods Data from patients treated in a multidisciplinary bladder cancer clinic (MDBCC) from 2008 to 2013 were reviewed retrospectively. Those who received TMT for MIBC were identified and matched (for sex, cT and cN stage, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group status, Charlson comorbidity score, treatment date, age, carcinoma in situ status, and hydronephrosis) with propensity scores to patients who underwent RC. Overall survival and disease-specific survival (DSS) were assessed with Cox proportional hazards modeling and a competing risk analysis, respectively. Results A total of 112 patients with MIBC were included after matching (56 who had been treated with TMT, and 56 who underwent RC). The median age was 68.0 years, and 29.5% had stage cT3/cT4 disease. At a median follow-up of 4.51 years, there were 20 deaths (35.7%) in the RC group (13 as a result of BC) and 22 deaths (39.3%) in the TMT group (13 as a result of BC). The 5-year DSS rate was 73.2% and 76.6% in the RC and TMT groups, respectively ( P = .49). Salvage cystectomy was performed in 6 (10.7%) of 56 patients who received TMT. Conclusion In the setting of a MDBCC, TMT yielded survival outcomes similar to those of matched patients who underwent RC. Appropriately selected patients with MIBC should be offered the opportunity to discuss various treatment options, including organ-sparing TMT.