Validity, reliability and responsiveness of a goniometer watch to measure pure forearm rotation.

Introduction: Innovative instruments have been designed to assess forearm rotation, an anatomically challenging motion to measure. This study assessed the concurrent validity, interrater reliability and responsiveness of a novel goniometer watch (GoWatch) to measure pure forearm rotation. The modified finger goniometer (MFG) was the criterion reference. Methods: Forty participants with restricted forearm rotation were recruited. Two raters measured supination and pronation using the GoWatch and MFG before and after a hand therapy session. Repeated-measures ANOVA assessed for systematic bias with an apriori residual error of 5° deemed as acceptable. Secondary analysis used intraclass coefficients (ICCs) to categorise interrater reliability. Responsiveness of the GoWatch was calculated using Cohen's d. Results: The GoWatch demonstrated acceptable agreement with the MFG with a mean difference for supination 1.19° and pronation 0.20°. Interrater reliability was also within acceptable limits with a mean difference GoWatch supination 4.43° and pronation 2.23°. Interrater reliability for GoWatch supination and pronation were categorized as excellent (ICC = 0.94) and good (ICC = 0.85) respectively. Systematic bias was observed in the instrument by rater interaction with rater two consistently underestimating GoWatch measures (p<.05). GoWatch supination showed small to medium responsiveness (Rater 1: d = 0.14; Rater 2: d = 0.29) and pronation very small to medium responsiveness (Rater 1: d = 0.29; Rater 2: d = 0.05). Conclusion: The GoWatch is a viable and user-friendly alternative to measure forearm rotation with demonstrable validity, interrater reliability and responsiveness. Further research is required to ensure systematic bias is not endemic when used across multiple raters.

Participatory peer research exploring the experience of learning during Covid-19 for allied health and healthcare science students.

INTRODUCTION: The teaching and learning experience of allied health and healthcare science students has altered because of the Covid-19 pandemic. Limited research has explored the experience on the future healthcare workforce using participatory research design. The aim of this study was to explore the impact of a global pandemic on the clinical and academic experiences of healthcare student using a co-production approach with student peer researchers. METHODS: A participatory research approach adopting online focus groups facilitated by students trained as peer researchers was adopted. First, second and final year students from occupational therapy, physiotherapy, podiatry, healthcare science, diagnostic radiography and imaging, radiotherapy and oncology, and speech and language therapy were recruited to six focus groups. Data generated through focus groups were analysed thematically using the DEPICT model to support a partnership approach. RESULTS: Twenty-three participants took part in six focus groups. The themes identified were: rapid changes to learning; living alongside Covid-19 and psychological impact. Students preferred blended learning approaches when available, as reduced peer interaction, studying and sleeping in the same space, and technology fatigue decreased motivation. CONCLUSION: Due to rapid changes in learning and the stress, anxiety and isolation created by the pandemic, managing study, personal life and placement resulted in a gap in confidence in clinical skills development for students. Students took their professional identity seriously, engaged in behaviours to reduce transmission of Covid-19 and employed a range of coping strategies to protect wellbeing. A challenge with the move to online delivery was the absence of informal peer learning and students indicated that moving forward they would value a hybrid approach to delivery. Higher Education should capitalise on innovative learning experiences developed during the pandemic however it is important to research the impact this has on student skill acquisition and learning experience.

Academic, clinical and personal experiences of undergraduate healthcare students during the COVID-19 pandemic: A prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 has impacted upon the role and safety of healthcare workers, with the potential to have a lasting effect on their wellbeing. Limited research has been conducted during previous pandemics exploring how student healthcare workers are impacted as they study and train for their professional careers. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the current study was to examine the specific impact of COVID-19 on the academic, clinical and personal experiences of healthcare students. METHOD: Undergraduate students across three year groups within the School of Health Sciences at Ulster University completed online Qualtrics surveys at three timepoints during one academic year (2020/2021). Quantitative survey data was downloaded from Qualtrics into SPSS Version 25 for descriptive analysis of each cross-sectional sample. Qualitative survey data was downloaded into text format, which was thematically analysed using content analysis. RESULTS: 412 students completed the survey at Time 1 (October 2020), n = 309 at Time 2 (December 2020) and n = 259 at Time 3 (April 2021). Academically, the pandemic had mostly a negative impact on the learning environment, the development of practical skills, the assessment process and opportunities for peer learning and support. Students reported increased stress and challenges managing their workload and maintaining a sense of motivation and routine. Clinically, they felt unprepared by the university for placement where the pandemic had an increasingly negative impact over time on learning and skill development. In terms of personal experiences, despite the majority of students taking steps to keep physically and mentally well, negative impacts on friendships, mental wellbeing and concerns for family were reported. The pandemic had not impacted upon career choice for most students. CONCLUSION: Consideration must be given to the development of practical skills so students feel prepared for their professional careers given the practical nature of their roles. Programme coordinators should adopt a holistic approach to student wellbeing.

Acceptability of online exercise-based interventions after breast cancer surgery: systematic review and narrative synthesis.

PURPOSE: eHealth and mHealth approaches are increasingly used to support cancer survivors. This review aimed to examine adherence, acceptability and satisfaction with Internet-based self-management programmes for post-surgical cancer rehabilitation and to identify common components of such interventions. METHODS: Nine electronic databases were searched from inception up to February 15, 2020, for relevant quantitative and qualitative studies evaluating Internet-based cancer rehabilitation interventions. Studies were required to include an exercise or physical activity-based self-management intervention and a measure of adherence, acceptability or user satisfaction with the programme. Two independent reviewers performed all data extraction and quality assessment procedures. Data were synthesized using a narrative approach. RESULTS: Six hundred ninety-six potential papers were identified and screened. Eleven met the inclusion criteria. Interventions had wide variations in levels of adherence, but the majority were reported as being acceptable to the users. Increased acceptability and user satisfaction were associated with interventions which were seen as time and cost-efficient, requiring acquisition of minimal or no new skills, which used coherent language, or which provided tailored information. The majority contained behaviour change components such as goal setting. CONCLUSIONS: Despite high levels of heterogeneity between studies, Internet-based approaches may be an acceptable method for the delivery of self-management interventions in post-surgical cancer rehabilitation. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: There is a need for further studies exploring factors associated with increased user engagement and usage of digital interventions in cancer rehabilitation settings. These findings should be used to help develop interventions prior to testing their effectiveness in adequately powered randomized controlled trials.

The effectiveness of working wrist splints in adults with rheumatoid arthritis: a mixed methods systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of working wrist splints in people with rheumatoid arthritis. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION: This review adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Ten databases were searched from inception until September 2012 for quantitative and qualitative studies on the effectiveness of working wrist splints in rheumatoid arthritis. DATA EXTRACTION: Data was extracted on participants, interventions, outcome measures and results. Experimental studies were evaluated using the van Tulder scale and the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Data was extracted by a single reviewer and all studies were reviewed by two blind reviewers. DATA SYNTHESIS: Twenty-three studies were included in the review (n = 1,492), 13 experimental studies including 9 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 2 qualitative studies. Data was summarized using best evidence synthesis and a meta-ethnographical approach guided qualitative evidence synthesis. There is strong quantitative evidence (including 9 RCTs), supported by conclusions from qualitative literature, that working wrist splints reduce pain (d = 0.7-0.8), moderate evidence that grip strength is improved (d = 0.3-0.4) and dexterity impaired and insufficient evidence of their effect on function. CONCLUSIONS: Working wrist splints reduce pain and improve grip in rheumatoid arthritis. The effect of splints on function is not yet clear.