Understanding the barriers and facilitators of healthcare services for brain injury and concurrent mental health and substance use issues: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: People with acquired brain injury (ABI) may experience concurrent conditions such as, mental health and substance use concerns, that require specialized care. There are services that aim to support people with ABI and these conditions separately; however, little is known about the facilitators and barriers of these services. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to engage stakeholders to investigate the facilitators and barriers of healthcare services for ABI and concurrent issues. METHODS: Semi-structured focus groups were conducted in-person and virtually with people with ABI, caregivers, healthcare professionals, and policy makers during a one-day event in British Columbia, Canada. Manifest content analysis was used with a constructivist perspective to analyze data. RESULTS: 90 participants (including 34 people with ABI) provided insights during 15 simultaneous focus groups. Three categories were identified: (1) complexity of ABI, (2) supports, (3) structure of care. Complexity of ABI outlined the ongoing basic needs after ABI and highlighted the need for public awareness of ABI. Supports outlined healthcare professional and community-based supports. Structure of care described people with ABI needing to meet criteria for support, experiences of navigating through the system and necessity of integrated services. CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight the facilitators and barriers of healthcare services for ABI and concurrent conditions and provide insights into the changes that may be needed. Doing so can improve the accessibility and quality of ABI healthcare services.

Ten Priorities for Research Addressing the Intersections of Brain Injury, Mental Health and Addictions: A Stakeholder-Driven Priority-Setting Study.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to engage key stakeholders in a health research priority-setting process to identify, prioritize and produce a community-driven list of research questions addressing intersectional issues on mental health and addictions (MHA) in acquired brain injury (ABI). METHODS: A multiphasic health research priority-setting process was co-designed and executed with community-based stakeholders, including researchers, health professionals, clinicians, service providers, representatives from brain injury associations, policy makers and people with lived experience of ABI and MHA, including patients and their family members. Stakeholders' ideas led to the generation of research questions, which were prioritized at a 1-day workshop. RESULTS: Fifty-nine stakeholders participated in the priority-setting activity during the workshop, which resulted in a rank-ordered list of the top 10 questions for research addressing the intersections of ABI and MHA. Questions identified touched on several pressing issues (e.g., opioid crisis, homelessness), encompassed multiple subtypes of ABI (e.g., hypoxic-ischaemic, mild traumatic), and involved different domains (e.g., identification, intervention) of health research. CONCLUSIONS: This community-driven health research priority-setting study identified and prioritized research questions addressing the intersections of ABI and MHA. Researchers and funding agencies should use this list to inform their agendas and address stakeholders' most urgent needs, fostering meaningful improvements to clinical services. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: An 11-person working group comprised of people with lived experience, service providers, researchers, healthcare professionals and other key stakeholders collaboratively developed and informed the scope, design, methodology and interpretation of this study. Over 50 community-based stakeholders contributed to the research priority-setting activity. One co-author is a person with lived experience.

Virtual Reality and Serious Videogame-Based Instruments for Assessing Spatial Navigation in Alzheimer's Disease: A Systematic Review of Psychometric Properties.

Over the past decade, research using virtual reality and serious game-based instruments for assessing spatial navigation and spatial memory in at-risk and AD populations has risen. We systematically reviewed the literature since 2012 to identify and evaluate the methodological quality and risk of bias in the analyses of the psychometric properties of VRSG-based instruments. The search was conducted primarily in July-December 2022 and updated in November 2023 in eight major databases. The quality of instrument development and study design were analyzed in all studies. Measurement properties were defined and analyzed according to COSMIN guidelines. A total of 1078 unique records were screened, and following selection criteria, thirty-seven studies were analyzed. From these studies, 30 instruments were identified. Construct and criterion validity were the most reported measurement properties, while structural validity and internal consistency evidence were the least reported. Nineteen studies were deemed very good in construct validity, whereas 11 studies reporting diagnostic accuracy were deemed very good in quality. Limitations regarding theoretical framework and research design requirements were found in most of the studies. VRSG-based instruments are valuable additions to the current diagnostic toolkit for AD. Further research is required to establish the psychometric performance and clinical utility of VRSG-based instruments, particularly the instrument development, content validity, and diagnostic accuracy for preclinical AD screening scenarios. This review provides a straightforward synthesis of the state of the art of VRSG-based instruments and suggests future directions for research.