ArticleImplementation science : IS2018
Why the uptake of eRehabilitation programs in stroke care is so difficult-a focus group study in the Netherlands.
Article in Implementation science : IS, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
32 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 66 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of mobile application types on stroke rehabilitation: a systematic review.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2023Pooled it
- Allied rehabilitation using caregiver-mediated exercises combined with telerehabilitation for stroke (ARMed4Stroke): A randomised controlled trial.Clinical rehabilitation · 2024Trial
- User Requirements of the Integrated Home-Based Rehabilitation Tool, Neurorehabilitation Ecosystem for Sustained Therapy: Multicenter Focus Group Study With Stroke Survivors, Caregivers, and Health Care Professionals.JMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies · 2026Article
- A Meta-Synthesis on Clients' Experience with Telerehabilitation.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Exploring the Influence of Digitalization on Multidisciplinary Poststroke Rehabilitation Practice: Qualitative Study.JMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies · 2026Article
- Utilisation of mobile apps in neurological rehabilitation practice among occupational therapists in India: a cross-sectional survey.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- User Needs for an Artificial Intelligence-Empowered Basic Activities of Daily Living Training System After Stroke: A Qualitative Study.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2026Article
- Exploring Rehabilitation Patients' Perspectives on What Matters for the Adoption of Home-Based Rehabilitation Technology: Q-Methodology Study.JMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies · 2025Article
- The complexity of home-based rehabilitation technology implementation for post-stroke motor rehabilitation in the Netherlands.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Acceptability of two mobile applications to support cross-sectoral, person-centred and empowering stroke rehabilitation - a process evaluation.Annals of medicine · 2024Article
- Designing and Evaluating IT Applications for Informal Caregivers: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- Improving telehealth for persons with multiple sclerosis - a cross-sectional study from the Australian MS longitudinal study.Disability and rehabilitation · 2024Article
- Telehealth in Informal Caregivers of Stroke Survivors: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Understanding the Barriers and Facilitators of Digital Health Technology (DHT) Implementation in Neurological Rehabilitation: An Integrative Systematic Review.Health services insights · 2024Review
- Examination of the Accuracy of Movement Tracking Systems for Monitoring Exercise for Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Using experience-based co-design to develop mobile/tablet applications to support a person-centred and empowering stroke rehabilitation.Research involvement and engagement · 2023Article
- Factors that influence the adoption of rehabilitation technologies: a multi-disciplinary qualitative exploration.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2023Article
- Factors that influence the provision of home-based rehabilitation services for people needing rehabilitation: a qualitative evidence synthesis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Review
- A scoping review of applications of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to telehealth service implementation initiatives.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Telerehabilitation during the COVID-19 pandemic in Sweden: a survey of use and perceptions among physiotherapists treating people with neurological diseases or older adults.BMC health services research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe uptake of eRehabilitation programs in stroke care is insufficient, despite the growing availability. The aim of this study was to explore which factors influence the uptake of eRehabilitation in stroke rehabilitation, among stroke patients, informal caregivers, and healthcare professionals.
methodsA qualitative focus group study with eight focus groups (6-8 participants per group) was conducted: six with stroke patients/informal caregivers and two with healthcare professionals involved in stroke rehabilitation (rehabilitation physicians, physical therapists, occupational therapists, psychologists, managers). Focus group interviews were audiotaped, transcribed in full, and analyzed by direct content analysis using the implementation model of Grol.
resultsThirty-two patients, 15 informal caregivers, and 13 healthcare professionals were included. A total of 14 influencing factors were found, grouped to 5 of the 6 levels of the implementation model of Grol (Innovation, Organizational context, Individual patient, Individual professional, and Economic and political context). Most quotes of patients, informal caregivers, and healthcare professionals were classified to factors at the level of the Innovation (e.g., content, attractiveness, and feasibility of eRehabilitation programs). In addition, for patients, relatively many quotes were classified to factors at the level of the individual patient (e.g., patients characteristics as fatigue and the inability to understand ICT-devices), and for healthcare professionals at the level of the organizational context (e.g., having sufficient time and the fit with existing processes of care).
conclusionAlthough there was a considerable overlap in reported factors between patients/informal caregivers and healthcare professionals when it concerns eRehabilitation as innovation, its seems that patients/informal caregivers give more emphasis to factors related to the individual patient, whereas healthcare professionals emphasize the importance of factors related to the organizational context. This difference should be considered when developing an implementation strategy for patients and healthcare professionals separately.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.