The Time Is Now: A FASTER Approach to Generate Research Evidence for Technology-Based Interventions in the Field of Disability and Rehabilitation.

Current approaches for generating high-quality research evidence for technology-based interventions in the field of disability and rehabilitation are inappropriate. Prevailing approaches often focus on randomized controlled trials as standard and apply clinical trial practices designed for pharmaceuticals; such approaches are unsuitable for technology-based interventions and are counterproductive to the goals of supporting people with disabilities and creating benefits for society. This communication is designed to: (1) advocate for the use of alternative approaches to generating evidence in the development and evaluation of technology-based interventions; (2) propose an alternative framework and guiding principles; and (3) stimulate action by multiple disciplines and sectors to discuss, adopt, and promote alternative approaches. Our Framework for Accelerated and Systematic Technology-based intervention development and Evaluation Research (FASTER) is informed by established innovation design processes, complex intervention development, evaluation, and implementation concepts as well as our collective experiences in technology-based interventions research and clinical rehabilitation practice. FASTER is intended to be meaningful, timely, and practical for researchers, technology developers, clinicians, and others who develop these interventions and seek evidence. We incorporate research methods and designs that better align with creating technology-based interventions and evidence for integration into practice. We propose future activities to improve the generation of research evidence, enable the selection of research methods and designs, and create standards for evidence evaluation to support rigor and applicability for technology-based interventions. With this communication we aim to improve and advance technology-based intervention integration from conception to use, thus responsibly accelerating innovation to have greater positive benefit for people and society.

Implementing a shared decision-making and cognitive strategy-based intervention: Knowledge user perspectives and recommendations.

The aim of this study was to employ knowledge user perspectives to develop recommendations that facilitate implementation of a complex, shared decision-making (SDM)-based intervention in an interprofessional setting. This study was part of a larger knowledge translation (KT) study in which interprofessional teams from five freestanding, academically affiliated, rehabilitation hospitals were tasked with implementing a cognitive strategy-based intervention approach that incorporates SDM known as Cognitive Orientation to daily Occupational Performance (CO-OP) to treat survivors of stroke. At the end of the 4-month CO-OP KT implementation support period, 10 clinicians, two from each site, volunteered as CO-OP site champions. A semi-structured focus group was conducted with 10 site champions 3 months following the implementation support period. To meet the study objective, an exploratory qualitative research design was used. The focus group session was audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analyzed through the lens of the integrated promoting action on research implementation in health services (iPARIHS) framework. The focus group participants (n = 8) consisted of occupational therapists, physical therapists, and speech language pathologists. Ten recommendations for CO-OP implementation were extracted and co-constructed from the focus group transcript. The recommendations reflected all four iPARHIS constructs: Facilitation, Context, Innovation, and Recipients. Implementation recommendations, from the knowledge user perspective, highlight that context-specific facilitation is key to integrating a novel, complex intervention into interprofessional practice. Facilitators should lay out a framework for training, communication and implementation that is structured but still provides flexibility for iterative learning and active problem-solving within the relevant practice context.

Resistance training and older adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus: strength of the evidence.

Objective. This paper analyzes the effects of resistance training (RT) on metabolic, neuromuscular, and cardiovascular functions in older adults (mean age ≥ 65 years) with type 2 diabetes (T2DM). Research Design and Methods. A systematic review conducted by two reviewers of the published literature produced 3 records based on 2 randomized controlled trials that assessed the effect of RT on disease process measures and musculoskeletal/body composition measures. Statistical, Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (version 2) software was used to compute Hedge's g, and results were calculated using the random effects model to account for methodological differences amongst studies. Results. Largest effect of RT was seen on muscle strength; especially lower body strength, while the point estimate effect on body composition was small and not statistically significant. The cumulative point estimate for the T2DM disease process measures was moderate and statistically significant. Conclusions. RT generally had a positive effect on musculoskeletal, body composition, and T2DM disease processes measures, with tentative conclusions based on a low number of completed RCTs. Thus, more research is needed on such programs for older adults (≥65 years) with T2DM.

Lessons from the business sector for successful knowledge management in health care: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The concept of knowledge management has been prevalent in the business sector for decades. Only recently has knowledge management been receiving attention by the health care sector, in part due to the ever growing amount of information that health care practitioners must handle. It has become essential to develop a way to manage the information coming in to and going out of a health care organization. The purpose of this paper was to summarize previous studies from the business literature that explored specific knowledge management tools, with the aim of extracting lessons that could be applied in the health domain. METHODS: We searched seven databases using keywords such as "knowledge management", "organizational knowledge", and "business performance". We included articles published between 2000-2009; we excluded non-English articles. RESULTS: 83 articles were reviewed and data were extracted to: (1) uncover reasons for initiating knowledge management strategies, (2) identify potential knowledge management strategies/solutions, and (3) describe facilitators and barriers to knowledge management. CONCLUSIONS: KM strategies include such things as training sessions, communication technologies, process mapping and communities of practice. Common facilitators and barriers to implementing these strategies are discussed in the business literature, but rigorous studies about the effectiveness of such initiatives are lacking. The health care sector is at a pinnacle place, with incredible opportunities to design, implement (and evaluate) knowledge management systems. While more research needs to be done on how best to do this in healthcare, the lessons learned from the business sector can provide a foundation on which to build.