Using design thinking to create and implement a 3D digital library of anatomical specimens.

Design thinking (DT) is a five-stage process (empathize, define, ideate, prototype, and test) that guides the creation of user-centered solutions to complex problems. DT is in common use outside of science but has rarely been applied to anatomical education. The use of DT in this study identified the need for flexible access to anatomical specimens outside of the anatomy laboratory and guided the creation of a digital library of three-dimensional (3D) anatomical specimens (3D Anatomy Viewer). To test whether the resource was fit for purpose, a mixed-methods student evaluation was undertaken. Student surveys (n = 46) were employed using the system usability scale (SUS) and an unvalidated acceptability questionnaire. These verified that 3D Anatomy Viewer was usable (SUS of 72%) and acceptable (agreement range of 77%-93% on all Likert-type survey statements, Cronbach's alpha = 0.929). Supplementary interviews (n = 5) were analyzed through content analysis and revealed three main themes: (1) a credible online supplementary learning resource; (2) learning anatomy with 3D realism and interactivity; (3) user recommendations for expanding the number of anatomical models, test questions, and gamification elements. These data demonstrate that a DT framework can be successfully applied to anatomical education for creation of a practical learning resource. Anatomy educators should consider employing a DT framework where student-centered solutions to learner needs are required.

Developing the Freezing of Gait Severity Tool: A Delphi consensus study to determine the content of a clinician-rated assessment for freezing of gait severity.

OBJECTIVES: There is no standardisation of tasks or measures for evaluation of freezing of gait severity in people with Parkinson's disease. This study aimed to develop a clinician-rated tool for freezing of gait severity (i.e. Freezing of Gait Severity Tool), through determining clinicians' ratings of the most important triggering circumstances to be examined and aspects of freezing of gait to be measured. DESIGN: A three-round, web-based Delphi study. PARTICIPANTS: Healthcare professionals, with at least five years' experience in managing freezing of gait in people with Parkinson. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Round 1 required participants (n = 28) to rate items on a 5-point Likert scale, based on priority for inclusion in the Freezing of Gait Severity Tool. In Round 2, participants (n = 18) ranked the items based on priority for inclusion. In Round 3, participants (n = 18) confirmed or rejected the shortlisted items by judging their ability, on a binary scale, to screen for freezing of gait, detect changes in freezing severity, and discriminate between degrees of severity. RESULTS: Participants agreed with the triggering circumstances of turning hesitation, narrow space hesitation, start hesitation, cognitive dual-tasking, and open space hesitation should be assessed; and the aspects of gait freezing to be measured included freezing type, number of freezing episodes during a task, and average duration of freezing episodes. CONCLUSIONS: This study attained a consensus for the items to be included in a clinician-rated tool for freezing of gait severity. Future studies should investigate psychometric properties and clinical feasibility of the Freezing of Gait Severity Tool.

Validity and reliability of a new clinician-rated tool for freezing of gait severity.

PURPOSE: The Freezing of Gait Severity Tool (FOG Tool) was developed because of limitations in existing assessments. This cross-sectional study investigated its validity and reliability. METHODS: People with Parkinson's disease (PD) were recruited consecutively from clinics. Those who could not walk eight-metres independently (with or without an assistive device), comprehend instructions, or with co-morbidities affecting walking were excluded. Participants completed a set of assessments including the FOG Tool, Timed Up and Go (TUG), and Freezing of Gait Questionnaire. The FOG Tool was repeated and those reporting no medication state change evaluated for test-retest reliability. Validity and reliability were investigated through Spearman's correlations and ICC (two-way, random). McNemar's test was applied to compare the FOG Tool and TUG on the proportion of people with freezing. RESULTS: Thirty-nine participants were recruited [79.5%(n = 31) male; Median(IQR): age-73.0(9.0) years; disease duration-4.0(5.8) years]. Fifteen (38.5%) contributed to test-retest reliability analyses. The FOG Tool demonstrated strongest associations with the Freezing of Gait Questionnaire (ρ = 0.67, 95%CI 0.43-0.83). Test-retest reliability was excellent (ICC = 0.96, 95%CI 0.88-0.99). The FOG Tool had 6.2 times the odds (95%CI 2.4-20.4, p < 0.001) of triggering freezing compared to the TUG. CONCLUSIONS: The FOG Tool appeared adequately valid and reliable in this small sample of people with PD. It was more successful in triggering freezing than the TUG.Implications for RehabilitationThe Freezing of Gait Severity Tool's assessment course is more effective than the commonly-used Timed Up and Go's assessment course for eliciting freezing of gait for clinical evaluation in people with Parkinson's disease.The Freezing of Gait Severity Tool can be considered for scoring freezing of gait severity in people with Parkinson's disease in the clinical setting.