TY - GEN A1 - Scheffler, Bettina A1 - Schimböck, Florian A1 - Schöler, Almut A1 - Rösner, Katrin A1 - Spallek, Jacob A1 - Kopkow, Christian T1 - Tailored GuideLine Implementation in STrokE Rehabilitation (GLISTER) in Germany. Protocol of a Mixed Methods Study Using the Behavior Change Wheel and the Theoretical Domains Framework T2 - Frontiers in Neurology N2 - Objective: Evidence-based guidelines are important for informing clinical decision-making and improving patient outcomes. There is inconsistent usage of guidelines among physical therapists involved in stroke rehabilitation, suggesting the existence of a gap between theory and practice. Addressing the German guideline “evidence-based rehabilitation of mobility after stroke (ReMoS),” the aims of this project are (1) to describe the current physical therapy practice within the context of stroke rehabilitation in Germany, (2) to evaluate barriers and facilitators of guideline usage, (3) to develop, and (4) to pilot test a theory-based, tailored implementation intervention for the benefit of guideline recommendations. Materials and Methods: This study uses a stepwise mixed methods approach for implementing a local guideline. A self-reported online questionnaire will be used to survey the current physical therapy practice in stroke rehabilitation. The same survey and systematic-mixed methods review will be used to evaluate the barriers and facilitators of guideline usage quantitatively. Semi-structured interviews will add a qualitative perspective on factors that influence ReMoS guideline implementation. The Behavior Change Wheel and Theoretical Domains Framework will be used to support the development of a tailored implementation intervention which will be pilot tested in a controlled study. Patient and physical therapy-related outcomes, as well as the appropriateness, such as acceptance and feasibility of the tailored implementation intervention, will be analyzed. Conclusion: This will be the first endeavor to implement a guideline in German stroke rehabilitation with a focus on changing care provider behavior based on the knowledge of current practice and determining factors using a tailored and theory-based intervention. KW - Stroke KW - Rehabilitation KW - Mixed-methods study KW - Guideline KW - Implementation Y1 - 2022 UR - https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fneur.2022.828521/full U6 - https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2022.828521 SN - 1664-2295 VL - 13 SP - 1 EP - 10 ER - TY - GEN A1 - Scheffler, Bettina A1 - Schimböck, Florian A1 - Schöler, Almut A1 - Rösner, Katrin A1 - Spallek, Jacob A1 - Kopkow, Christian T1 - Current physical therapy practice and implementation factors regarding the evidence-based ‘Rehabilitation of Mobility after Stroke (ReMoS)’ guideline in Germany: a cross-sectional online survey T2 - BMC neurology N2 - Background Evaluation of the current physical therapy practice for German stroke rehabilitation with respect to the ‘Rehabilitation of Mobility after Stroke (ReMoS)’ guideline recommendations and the associated implementation factors. Methods A descriptive cross-sectional study employing an online survey was performed among German physical therapists in 2019. The survey consisted of three sections with open and closed questions: 1) self-reported use of ReMoS recommendations, 2) barriers of guideline use and 3) socio-demographic characteristics. The benchmark level for guideline adherent physical therapy was set at > 80%. Results Data from 170 questionnaires were eligible for analysis. Participants’ mean age was 41.6 years, 69.4% were female, while 60.1% had no academic degree. The ReMoS guideline was unknown to 52.9% of the responders. Out of all the 46 ReMoS guideline recommendations, only ‘intensive walking training without a treadmill’ was reported to be performed in a guideline adherent manner. Respondents usually denied any personal limitations, such as limited knowledge, or that the ReMoS guideline did not fit their routine practice. Conclusions Among German physical therapists, the ReMoS guideline is not well-known and many interventions are not performed as recommended, illustrating the discrepancies between the ReMoS guideline recommendations and current physical therapy practice. Interventions aimed at overcoming this gap should consider both knowledge of existing barriers and facilitators of guideline usage. KW - Stroke KW - Rehabilitation KW - Physical therapy KW - Guideline adherence KW - Implementation factors KW - Cross-sectional study KW - Online survey Y1 - 2022 UR - https://bmcneurol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12883-022-02780-5 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1186/s12883-022-02780-5 SN - 1471-2377 VL - 22 SP - 1 EP - 13 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Roesner, Katrin A1 - Scheffler, Bettina A1 - Kaehler, Martina A1 - Schmidt-Maciejewski, Bianca A1 - Boettger, Tabea A1 - Saal, Susanne T1 - Effects of physical therapy modalities for motor function, functional recovery, and post-stroke complications in patients with severe stroke: a systematic review update JF - Systematic Reviews N2 - Background Physical therapy interventions play a crucial role in the daily care of patients recovering from severe stroke. However, the efficacy of these interventions and associated modalities, including duration, intensity, and frequency, have not been fully elucidated. In 2020, a systematic review reported the beneficial effects of physical therapy for patients with severe stroke but did not assess therapeutic modalities. We aim to update the current evidence on the effects of physical therapy interventions and their modalities in relation to the recovery phase in people with severe stroke in a hospital or inpatient rehabilitation facility. Methods We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and three other relevant databases between December 2018 and March 2021 and updated the search between April 2021 and March 2023. ClinicalTrials.gov and ICTRP for searching trial registries helped to identify ongoing RCTs since 2023. We included individual and cluster randomized controlled trials in the English and German languages that compared physical therapy interventions to similar or other interventions, usual care, or no intervention in a hospital or rehabilitation inpatient setting. We screened the studies from this recent review for eligibility criteria, especially according to the setting. Critical appraisal was performed according to the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool 2.0. The data were synthesized narratively. Results The update identified 15 new studies, cumulating in a total of 30 studies (n = 2545 participants) meeting the eligibility criteria. These studies reported 54 outcomes and 20 physical therapy interventions. Two studies included participants during the hyperacute phase, 4 during the acute phase,18 during the early subacute phase, and 3 in the late subacute phase. Three studies started in the chronic phase. Summarised evidence has revealed an uncertain effect of physical therapy on patient outcomes (with moderate to low-quality evidence). Most studies showed a high risk of bias and did not reach the optimal sample size. Little was stated about the standard care and their therapy modalities. Discussion There is conflicting evidence for the effectiveness of physical therapy interventions in patients with severe stroke. There is a need for additional high-quality studies that also systematically report therapeutic modalities from a multidimensional perspective in motor stroke recovery. Due to the high risk of bias and the generally small sample size of the included studies, the generalizability of the findings to large and heterogeneous volumes of outcome data is limited.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42021244285. KW - Schlaganfall KW - Stroke KW - Physical Therapy KW - Physiotherapie Y1 - 2024 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-024-02676-0 SN - 2046-4053 VL - 13 IS - 1 PB - Springer Science and Business Media LLC ER -