The role of multiplatform messaging applications in burns care and rehabilitation: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Multiplatform messaging applications also referred to as cross-platform instant messaging play an important role in delivery of healthcare and education with its low cost, ease of use and accessibility. AIM: To evaluate the existing evidence regarding the use of multiplatform messaging applications in facilitating consultations and decision-making processes in the context of burns care, as well as to assess the impact of such applications on burns care and rehabilitation. METHOD: A systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and PROSPERO protocol CRD42021265203. The CASP and JBI tools were used to evaluate the quality of the studies. Eight hundred fifty-three papers were retrieved from PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, EMBASE and LILACS published up to July 2022 (updated August 2023) with no time restrictions applied. RESULTS: An analysis of the seven studies included in this review, inclusive of 16 Multiplatform messaging applications, revealed six themes. These encompassed the utilization of social media for directing and managing clinical practice, as a mode of communication, for evaluating the quality-of-care provision, for investigating available platforms and their technological features, measuring quality of life and for examining issues related to confidentiality. CONCLUSION: Multiplatform messaging applications offer a solution for individuals with burn injuries to stay in direct contact with burn specialist clinicians for their follow-up and subsequent rehabilitation phase of recovery.

Clinical utility and validity testing of a co-designed outcome measure for hand burn injuries.

INTRODUCTION: A new outcome measure for hand burn injuries was co-designed within a Participatory Action Research framework with expert clinicians and individuals with hand burn injuries. The outcome measure reviews activities which are commonly interrupted post hand burn injuries and includes 18 activities. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to establish the clinical utility, face, and content validity of the newly developed outcome measure. METHODS: Three constructs of interest were examined using study specific questionnaires from the perspectives of clinicians and individuals with hand burn injuries. Clinicians working in burns centres around Australia and New Zealand and individuals attending a burn centre within one tertiary hospital trialled the outcome measure. Upon testing the outcome measure each participant completed the questionnaire. RESULTS: Twenty individuals with hand burn injuries and eight clinicians trialled the outcome measure. There was 85% agreement from individuals and 100% agreement from clinicians for face validity. Content validity was tested across the domains of relevance and clarity. Individuals rated all activities and clinicians rated 16 activities as relevant. Clarity of activities was high for both participant groups (>75% agreement). Clinical utility (measured in the domains of appropriateness, accessibility, practicability, and acceptability) was high, 95% of individuals reported agreement for practicability and 100% agreement for acceptability. Clinicians reported agreement of > 87.5% for appropriateness, accessibility, practicability, and acceptability. CONCLUSION: The results demonstrated agreement for clinical utility, face, and content validity of the co-design outcome measure for hand burn injuries. Further validity and reliability testing is planned, including Rasch analysis.

Patient Experience in Adjunct Controller-Free Hand Tracking Virtual Reality Tasks for Upper-Limb Occupational Therapy Rehabilitation.

Benefits of immersive virtual reality rehabilitation (VRR) include increased motivation and improved transfer of skills to real-world tasks. The introduction of Oculus hand-tracking technology allowed for the development of VRR games that do not need virtual reality (VR) hand controllers. This is beneficial as participants with upper limb impairments/injuries may have difficulties with/be limited in using/manipulating VR hand controllers. In this project, a VRR game was developed and evaluated. The aim of this study was to determine patient experience when using VRR as an adjunct to upper-limb rehabilitation. N = 20 participants receiving upper limb rehabilitation completed a series of VRR tasks by playing the "smoothie bar" VRR game. After the completion of the VRR tasks, the participant experience was evaluated via a study-specific questionnaire. Key findings include 95% agreement that VRR tasks were fun and engaging and 75% agreed that VR tasks will be helpful to include in their rehabilitation. Hands-tracking VRR has a high potential to be used as an adjunct intervention in upper limb rehabilitation.

Exploration of individuals perspectives of recovery following severe hand burn injuries.

INTRODUCTION: Burns to one or both hands can impact how a person interacts with the world around them. Research regarding the specific impact of hand burn injuries and the experiences of individuals who have sustained hand burn injuries remains limited. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to explore the lived experiences of people with severe hand burn injuries, including their return to daily activities. METHODS: This study used an interpretive description approach, incorporating 23 semi-structured interviews with people who had sustained severe hand burn injuries. RESULTS: A major theme, "changes over time ", was identified and reflected the progressive nature of the experience over time. This was present in all three sub-themes: physical recovery, activities of daily living recovery, and psychosocial impact. Participants described a dual process of managing the recovery of the burn injury and burn rehabilitation interventions, whilst simultaneously learning to live with their injury and finding ways to engage in their occupations to the best of their abilities. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS: The findings of the study suggest that burns recovery could be described in terms of performance rather than impairment and needs to be continuously monitored overtime.

A feasibility study of the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) in the burn cohort in an acute tertiary facility.

BACKGROUND: Retrospective auditing identified the need to implement a client centered tool to measure occupational performance and re engagement in activities after burn injury. The Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) was chosen as it has a broad focus on occupational performance across the lifespan. However, given the time constraints that acute care clinicians work within in a tertiary teaching hospital, a feasibility study was warranted to identify the time to complete the COPM and any potential barriers which may arise in order to evaluate the appropriateness of using this tool. METHODS: This project was a prospective cohort study. All patients presenting to the ward and the Specialist Burns Outpatient Clinic were consecutively enrolled in this study. Information was collected regarding administration of the COPM including administration time, number of interruptions and reasons for non-completion of the outcome measure e.g. wound dressing procedures, surgery, scheduling conflicts. A survey method was used to explore the perceptions of Occupational Therapy clinicians regarding use of the COPM in clinical practice. RESULTS: Over the course of the study period 70 COPM's were administered. The average time for administration across both settings was 9 min. Individually the average time taken for administration of the COPM with inpatients was 11.21 min, in the outpatient setting 7.85 min. The Survey Monkey questionnaire was emailed to 58 occupational therapy clinicians working at the facility associated with the study. The response rate was 41.4% (24). DISCUSSION: Patient reported outcome measures are central to patient centred care which is a core element of health care provision. Results from this study found that the COPM took approximately 9 min to administer, which is suitable within the time constraints of an acute tertiary environment and would be feasible in our setting. Fifty one percent of the participants identified return to work as the activity of daily living most impacted by their burn injury. As burn injuries impact all domains of daily life the use of patient reported outcome measures to direct goal orientated care is imperative. CONCLUSION: This study found that the time to administer the COPM is feasible within the acute tertiary setting. Perceived barriers identified can be overcome with increased knowledge of client centred practice and the importance of goal directed care. The use of patient reported outcome measures in clinical practice empowers consumers to identify what goals they would like to achieve.

A Cross-sectional Survey of Health Professionals Across Australia and New Zealand to Determine What Outcome Measures Are Important From a Clinical Perspective Post Hand Burn Injury.

Outcome measures are used in healthcare to evaluate clinical practice, measure efficiencies and to determine the quality of health care provided. The Burns Trauma Rehabilitation: Allied Health Practice Guidelines advocates for the collection of outcome measures post burn injuries across different time points. These guidelines recommend multiple tools which can be utilized when measuring outcomes post burn injuries. The aim of this study was to gather information from specialist clinicians regarding their clinical practice and the outcome measurement tools used post hand burn injuries. This cross-sectional study used a survey design to collect data at one given point in time across a sample population. A total of 43 clinical specialists allied health professionals responded to the survey. Respondents indicated that their patients considered hand dexterity was the most important outcome. Three months post burn injury was the most common timepoint for measurement (n = 31, 72.1%) followed by six months (n = 27, 62.8%). Patient report of hand function (n = 42, 97.7%) and observation (n = 41, 95.3%) were the most frequently reported assessment methods. The Jamar Dynamometer (n = 40, 93%), goniometer (n = 39, 90.7%) and pinch gauge (n = 36, 83.7) were the most frequency cited assessment tools. The findings of this study suggest that clinical specialist allied health collect some outcome measures in their routine practice. Based on the respondent's perceptions of barriers when using outcome measures and lack of reliable/validated tools to measure hand burn outcomes, there is a need for further studies in this area.

A systematic review to investigate outcome tools currently in use for those with hand burns, and mapping psychometric properties of outcome measures.

BACKGROUND: Severe burn injuries to the hand impact multiple domains of function and participation. Measurement of outcomes after hand burn injuries is multifaceted and is influenced by several variables. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this systematic review was to review outcome measures reported in studies used to measure outcomes after severe hand burn injuries; and to critically evaluate the reliability, validity and clinical utility of each hand assessment tool identified from the literature to determine suitability for use with the burn's population. DATA SOURCES: A search of the published literature using electronic data bases MEDLINE, CINAHL, PEDro, OT seeker and PubMed was undertaken. Studies were included if they reported assessment tools and outcome measures used to determine hand function after severe burn injuries; were published in English and available in their full-length. Studies were excluded if they were related to a group under 18 years of age. RESULTS: Thirty-four papers were included in this systematic review. A total of 25 outcome measures were confirmed for inclusion in this paper and each underwent further evaluation to identify their psychometric properties. LIMITATIONS: A factor which could cause bias in this systematic review was the search was restricted to English language journals therefore excluding any primary papers in other languages. Mapping of the outcome measures to the ICF was conducted by the primary author which may give rise to bias however a member checking was conducted in order to remove this bias. CONCLUSIONS: This review established that no one outcome measure meets all the psychometric properties of validity, reliability and responsiveness SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER PROSPERO: CRD42018085059.