Client and clinician perspectives about a virtual education and exercise chronic disease management programme for people with hip and knee osteoarthritis.

INTRODUCTION: Osteoarthritis (OA) is one of the most prevalent chronic conditions in Canada. Despite the established benefits of non-pharmacological management (education, exercise) for people with OA, many do not receive treatment, resulting in pain, decreased physical function, and poorer quality of life. Virtual programme options grew significantly during the recent pandemic and may provide longer-term opportunities for increased uptake by reaching individuals otherwise unable to participate. This study explored the experiences and perspectives of clients participating in and clinicians providing the Good Life with osteoArthritis: Denmark (GLA:DTM) Canada remote programme. METHODS: This qualitative descriptive study recruited 10 clients with hip and/or knee OA and 11 clinicians across Canada using purposive sampling. An online pre-interview survey was completed, and individual interviews were conducted, audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed independently by two researchers using inductive thematic analysis. Coding and analyses were initially conducted separately by group and then compared and combined. RESULTS: Four overarching themes (and 11 subthemes) were identified: (1) Expected and unexpected benefits of virtual programs; (2) Drawbacks to virtual programs; (3) Programme delivery in a virtual world; (4) Shifting and non-shifting perspectives. Although initially sceptical, after completion of the programme, clients were in favour of virtual delivery with many benefits described. Clinicians' perspectives varied about feedback aimed to correct client movement patterns. CONCLUSIONS: Clients and clinicians identified important experiential and procedural elements for virtual chronic disease management programs that include education and exercise. Additional work is needed to understand if the GLA:DTM remote outcomes are equivalent to the in-person programme.

Core requirements of frailty screening in the emergency department: an international Delphi consensus study.

INTRODUCTION: Frailty is associated with adverse outcomes among patients attending emergency departments (EDs). While multiple frailty screens are available, little is known about which variables are important to incorporate and how best to facilitate accurate, yet prompt ED screening. To understand the core requirements of frailty screening in ED, we conducted an international, modified, electronic two-round Delphi consensus study. METHODS: A two-round electronic Delphi involving 37 participants from 10 countries was undertaken. Statements were generated from a prior systematic review examining frailty screening instruments in ED (logistic, psychometric and clinimetric properties). Reflexive thematic analysis generated a list of 56 statements for Round 1 (August-September 2021). Four main themes identified were: (i) principles of frailty screening, (ii) practicalities and logistics, (iii) frailty domains and (iv) frailty risk factors. RESULTS: In Round 1, 13/56 statements (23%) were accepted. Following feedback, 22 new statements were created and 35 were re-circulated in Round 2 (October 2021). Of these, 19 (54%) were finally accepted. It was agreed that ideal frailty screens should be short (<5 min), multidimensional and well-calibrated across the spectrum of frailty, reflecting baseline status 2-4 weeks before presentation. Screening should ideally be routine, prompt (<4 h after arrival) and completed at first contact in ED. Functional ability, mobility, cognition, medication use and social factors were identified as the most important variables to include. CONCLUSIONS: Although a clear consensus was reached on important requirements of frailty screening in ED, and variables to include in an ideal screen, more research is required to operationalise screening in clinical practice.

Guiding Documents for Engaging with Remote Chronic Disease Management Programs as a Healthcare Provider: A Scoping Review.

Introduction: Chronic disease management programs (CDMP) that include education and exercise enhance outcomes and reduce healthcare costs. Remote CDMP have the potential to provide convenient, cost-effective, and accessible options for individuals, but it is unclear how to best implement programs that include education and exercise. This review identified and synthesized resources for implementing remote CDMP programs that incorporate education and exercise. Methods: Peer-reviewed and grey literature were systematically searched from January 1998 to May 2022. Covidence software was used for screening and extraction. The data were synthesized and presented in a narrative and tabular format. Results: Six peer-reviewed manuscripts and six grey literature documents published between 2006-2022 were included. All resources described individual programs targeting various chronic conditions. Provider training, consent, participant screening, and safety considerations were identified. Conclusions: Guidelines for remote CFMP programs are lacking. Additional work is needed to design remote CDMP guidelines incorporating education and exercise.

Undertaking Rehabilitation Research During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Emergent Strategies From a Trainee-Faculty Workshop.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted everyday rehabilitation research. Many academic institutions have halted in-person human research including rehabilitation sciences. Researchers are faced with several barriers to continuing their research programs. The purpose of this perspective article is to report the results of an interdisciplinary workshop aimed at understanding the challenges and corresponding strategies for conducting rehabilitation research during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Twenty-five rehabilitation researchers (17 trainees and eight faculty) attended a 2-h facilitated online workshop in to discuss challenges and strategies they had experienced and employed to conduct rehabilitation research during the COVID-19 pandemic. Results: Rehabilitation researchers reported challenges with (1) pandemic protocol adjustments, (2) participant accessibility, and (3) knowledge dissemination, along with corresponding strategies to these challenges. Researchers experienced disruptions in study outcomes and intervention protocols to adhere to public health guidelines and have suggested implementing novel virtual approaches and study toolkits to facilitate offsite assessment. Participant accessibility could be improved by engaging community stakeholders in protocol revisions to ensure equity, safety, and feasibility. Researchers also experienced barriers to virtual conferences and publication, suggested opportunities for smaller networking events, and revisiting timeframes for knowledge dissemination. Conclusion: This perspective article served as a catalyst for discussion among rehabilitation researchers to identify novel and creative approaches that address the complexities of conducting rehabilitation research during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond.

Refining items for a preference-based, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis specific, health-related quality of life scale.

Objective: The aim of this study was to refine the items of a preference-based amyotrophic lateral sclerosis health-related quality of life scale (PB-ALS HRQL scale) based on domains generated in a previous study. Methods: Survey methodology was used to assess item importance rating (IR) and independence. Median importance was calculated for each item and a rating of "very important" was required for the item to remain. Correlations were used to examine item independence. Highly correlated items (rs > 0.7) were considered for removal. Cognitive debriefing (CD) interviews, conducted by Zoom, telephone, or email based on participant preference and communication needs, were used to identify potential issues. Participants provided feedback about wording, clarity, response options, and recall period on randomly selected items. Items were considered finalized when three sequential CD participants approved the item with no revisions. Results: Thirty-four people with ALS (PALS, n = 16 females; age range 44-78 years; ALS Functional Rating Scale-Revised [ALSFRS-R] range 0-48) in Canada completed the survey; a subset of 18 PALS completed CD interviews (n = 8 female; age range 44-71 years; ALSFRS-R range 0-48). Four items were highly correlated with one or more items, were not rated as very important, or were not approved via CD and were removed. Conclusions: The final four-response option PB-ALS Scale includes eight items: recreation and leisure, mobility, interpersonal interactions and relationships, eating and swallowing, handling objects, communicating, routine activities, and mood. The next step is to translate the PB-ALS Scale into French and develop a scoring algorithm based on PALS' preferences.

Do Generic Preference-Based Measures Accurately Capture Areas of Health-Related Quality of Life Important to Individuals with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis: A Content Validation Study.

OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this study were to 1) assess the content validity of generic preference-based measures (GPBMs), and (2) examine the convergent validity of the EuroQol 5 Dimension 5 Level (EQ-5D-5L), against the Patient Generated Index (PGI) in Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS). METHODS: Participants were recruited from 3 clinical sites across Canada. The PGI, EQ-5D-5L and Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Functional Rating Scale-Revised (ALSFRS-R) were administered through an online or hardcopy survey and scores compared for convergent validation. Domains nominated by participants as important to their health-related quality of life were generated using the PGI, classified using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) and mapped onto GPBMs to determine content coverage. RESULTS: Fifty-two participants (N=28 female; 61.3 ± 11.6 mean age ± standard deviation (SD); 3.5 ± 2.9 mean ± SD years since diagnosis) completed this study. The top three ICF domains identified by participants were recreation and leisure, lower limb mobility, and interpersonal relationships. The Quality of Well-Being Self-Administered (QWB-SA) scale had the highest content coverage (87%) and the Health Utilities Index 3 (HUI3) had the lowest (33%). Two domains were covered by all GPBMs and no GPBM included all domains identified as important by participants. A moderate correlation coefficient of 0.52 between the PGI and EQ-5D-5L was found. CONCLUSION: The majority of GPBMs covered only approximately half of the domains important to individuals with ALS suggesting the need for an ALS specific preference-based measure to better reflect the health-related quality of life of this population.

Understanding Frailty Screening: a Domain Mapping Exercise.

BACKGROUND: Many definitions and operationalisations of frailty exclude psychosocial factors, such as social isolation and mental health, despite considerable evidence of the links between frailty and these factors. This study aimed to investigate the health domains covered by frailty screening tools. METHODS: A systematic search of the literature was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, and PsycInfo were searched from inception to December 31, 2018. Data related to the domains of each screening tool were extracted and mapped onto a framework based on the biopsychosocial model of Lehmans et al. (2009) and Wade & Halligans (2017). RESULTS: Sixty-seven frailty screening tools were captured in 79 articles. All screening tools assessed biological factors, 73% assessed psychological factors, 52% assessed social factors, and 78% assessed contextual factors. Under half (43%) of the tools evaluated all four domains, 33% evaluated three of four domains, 12% reported two of four domains, and 13% reported one domain (biological). CONCLUSION: This review found considerable variation in the assessment domains covered by frailty screening tools. Frailty is a broad construct, and frailty screening tools need to cover a wide variety of domains to enhance screening and outcomes assessment.

Perspectives of older adults, caregivers, and healthcare providers on frailty screening: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Screening is an important component of understanding and managing frailty. This study examined older adults', caregivers' and healthcare providers' perspectives on frailty and frailty screening. METHODS: Fourteen older adults and caregivers and 14 healthcare providers completed individual or focus group interviews. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using line-by-line emergent coding techniques and inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: The interviews yielded several themes with associated subthemes: definitions and conceptualizations of frailty, perceptions of "frail", factors contributing to frailty (physical,, cognitive, social, pharmaceutical, nutritional), and frailty screening (current practices, tools in use, limitations, recommendations). CONCLUSION: Older adults, caregivers and healthcare providers have similar perspectives regarding frailty; both identified frailty as multi-dimensional and dynamic. Healthcare providers need clear "next steps" to provide meaning to frailty screening practices, which may improve use of frailty-screening tools.