Search

To update a previous review of psychometric properties of performance-based outcome measurement instruments (PerFOMs) for task performance in the context of meal activity of older adults (≥65 years) with suspected oropharyngeal dysphagia (OD). Systematic searches were conducted in PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, SCOPUS, and Web of Science. Studies on PerFOMs that covers items reflecting skills in the pre-oral, oral, and pharyngeal stages of ingestion during meals were included. Two review authors independently screened, extracted, and evaluated the methodological rigour and quality of the reported psychometric properties in the included studies using the guidelines of the COnsensus-based Standards for the Selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN). Twenty-three articles featuring nine original PerFOMs and five translated versions were included. PerFOM development and content validity were rated with inadequate or doubtful methodological quality across all studies. The quality of the evidence across the additional psychometric properties of the PerFOMs was very low for two, ranged from very low to moderate for six, and from very low to high for five. There is limited evidence of the psychometric properties of available PerFOMs for measuring task performance during meals in older adults with OD, and further validation is warranted. Assessing the mealtime performance of older adults with oropharyngeal dysphagia (OD) provides important information. Performance-based outcome measurement instruments (PerFOMs) need to be valid and reliable. Clinicians need to be careful when choosing PerFOMs to assess the mealtime performance of older adults with OD as there is insufficient evidence on the quality of available instruments. Established guidelines and standards should be used when developing and investigating psychometric properties of PerFOMs assessing mealtime performance of older adults with OD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rehabilitation of the upper extremity (UE) is an essential part of the process following an acquired brain injury, where robot technologies have the potential of making the rehabilitation more intensive and effective. However, the implementation of robot technologies in a clinical setting can be complicated and not always successful. The aim of this study was to evaluate the implementation of the robot technology Armeo®Spring (Hocoma, Volketswil, Switzerland) at a specialized neurorehabilitation center, and to propose a list of actions for further implementation of the technology.The Study, Act and Plan phases of the Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) model for structuring technology implementations was applied as the methodological framework in this study. In the Study-phase, nine semi-structured interviews with therapists, using Armeo®Spring, were conducted to evaluate the current implementation. In the Act-phase, a workshop was held with 13 participants to discuss the findings of the Study-phase and to find possible solutions to the identified problems. The results were incorporated into a list of actions (Plan-phase) for further implementation of Armeo®Spring.Facilitating and inhibiting factors for the implementation of Armeo®Spring were identified. Facilitating factors were the practical "hands-on" approach during training, support from the management, support and sparring with colleagues as well as a positive work culture. The inhibiting factors were related to the retention of the therapists' acquired competencies, the identification of the type of patient that can benefit from this form of training, challenges due to the technical use of Armeo®Spring, and prioritization of the rehabilitation needs of the patients.Several solutions were proposed in the Act-phase, which subsequently resulted in eight concrete actions to facilitate the further implementation of Armeo®Spring. It is expected that these actions will contribute to the further implementation of Armeo®Spring at the neurorehabilitation center. As a first step, an Armeo®Spring group with therapists from all relevant wards was established.