Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27992492›Full record

ArticlePloS one2016

Promoting Therapists' Use of Motor Learning Strategies within Virtual Reality-Based Stroke Rehabilitation.

Danielle E Levac, Stephanie M N Glegg, Heidi Sveistrup, Heather Colquhoun, Patricia Miller, Hillel Finestone, Vincent DePaul, Jocelyn E Harris, Diana Velikonja

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Evidence-Based Practice Implementation in Stroke Rehabilitation: A Scoping Review of Barriers and Facilitators.The American journal of occupational therapy : official publication of the American Occupational Therapy Association
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Danielle E LevacDepartment of Physical Therapy, Movement Sciences and Rehabilitation, Bouve College of Health Sciences, Northeastern University, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Stephanie M N GleggTherapy Department, Sunny Hill Health Centre for Children, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Heidi SveistrupSchool of Rehabilitation Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Heather ColquhounDepartment of Occupational Science and Occupational Therapy, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Patricia MillerSchool of Rehabilitation Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Hillel FinestonePhysiatry, Élisabeth Bruyère Hospital and Bruyère Continuing Care, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Vincent DePaulSchool of Rehabilitation Therapy, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
Jocelyn E HarrisSchool of Rehabilitation Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Diana VelikonjaRegional Rehabilitation Center, Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTherapists use motor learning strategies (MLSs) to structure practice conditions within stroke rehabilitation. Virtual reality (VR)-based rehabilitation is an MLS-oriented stroke intervention, yet little support exists to assist therapists in integrating MLSs with VR system use.

methodA pre-post design evaluated a knowledge translation (KT) intervention incorporating interactive e-learning and practice, in which 11 therapists learned how to integrate MLSs within VR-based therapy. Self-report and observer-rated outcome measures evaluated therapists' confidence, clinical reasoning and behaviour with respect to MLS use. A focus group captured therapists' perspectives on MLS use during VR-based therapy provision.

resultsThe intervention improved self-reported confidence about MLS use as measured by confidence ratings (p <0.001). Chart-Stimulated Recall indicated a moderate level of competency in therapists' clinical reasoning about MLSs following the intervention, with no changes following additional opportunities to use VR (p = .944). On the Motor Learning Strategy Rating Instrument, no behaviour change with respect to MLS use was noted (p = 0.092). Therapists favoured the strategy of transferring skills from VR to real-life tasks over employing a more comprehensive MLS approach.

conclusionThe KT intervention improved therapists' confidence but did not have an effect on clinical reasoning or behaviour with regard to MLS use during VR-based therapy.

Indexed as

AgedAttitude of Health PersonnelEvidence-Based MedicineFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPhysical Therapy SpecialtyProblem-Based LearningSelf ReportStroke RehabilitationTranslational Research, BiomedicalVirtual Reality Exposure Therapy

Identifiers

PMID27992492
PMCPMC5167266

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.