Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30856191›Full record

Observational studyPloS one2019

Implementing a function-based cognitive strategy intervention within inter-professional stroke rehabilitation teams: Changes in provider knowledge, self-efficacy and practice.

Sara E McEwen, Michelle Donald, Katelyn Jutzi, Kay-Ann Allen, Lisa Avery, Deirdre R Dawson, Mary Egan, Katherine Dittmann, Anne Hunt, Jennifer Hutter and 3 more

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. 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

13 authors.

Sara E McEwenSt. John's Rehab Research Program, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-8529-7717
Michelle DonaldNorth & East GTA Stroke Network, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Katelyn JutziSt. John's Rehab Research Program, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Kay-Ann AllenSt. John's Rehab Research Program, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-3815-1045
Lisa AveryAvery Information Services Ltd., Orillia, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-8431-5143
Deirdre R DawsonRehabilitation Sciences Institute, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Mary EganSchool of Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Katherine DittmannSt. John's Rehab Research Program, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Anne HuntRehabilitation Sciences Institute, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Jennifer HutterSt. John's Rehab Research Program, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Sylvia QuantDepartment of Physical Therapy, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Jorge RiosSt. John's Rehab Research Program, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Elizabeth LinkewichNorth & East GTA Stroke Network, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Funding

CIHR PHE-141799
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Cognitive Orientation to daily Occupational Performance (CO-OP) approach is a complex rehabilitation intervention in which clients are taught to use problem-solving cognitive strategies to acquire personally-meaningful functional skills, and health care providers are required to shift control regarding treatment goals and intervention strategies to their clients. A multi-faceted, supported, knowledge translation (KT) initiative was targeted at the implementation of CO-OP in inpatient stroke rehabilitation teams at five freestanding rehabilitation hospitals. The study objective was to estimate changes in rehabilitation clinicians' knowledge, self-efficacy, and practice related to implementing CO-OP.

methodsA single arm pre-post and 6-month follow up study was conducted. CO-OP KT consisted of a 2-day workshop, 4 months of implementation support, a consolidation session, and infrastructure support. In addition, a sustainability plan was implemented. Consistent with CO-OP principles, teams were given control over specific implementation goals and strategies. Multiple choice questions (MCQ) were used to assess knowledge. A self-efficacy questionnaire with 3 subscales (Promoting Cognitive Strategy Use, PCSU; Client-Focused Therapy, CFT; Top-Down Assessment and Treatment, TDAT) was developed for the study. Medical record audits were used to investigate practice change. Data analysis for knowledge and self-efficacy utilized mixed effects models. Medical record audits were analyzed with frequency counts and chi-squares.

resultsSixty-five health care providers consisting mainly of occupational and physical therapists entered the study. Mixed effects models revealed intervention effects for MCQs, CFT, and PCSU at post intervention and follow-up, but no effect on TDAT. No charts showed any evidence of CO-OP use at baseline, compared to 8/40 (20%) post intervention. Post intervention there was a trend towards reduction in impairment goals and significantly more component goals were set (z = 2.7, p = .007).

Indexed as

Patient Care TeamClinical CompetenceCognitionCognitive Behavioral TherapyCombined Modality TherapyFollow-Up StudiesHumansOccupational TherapistsOccupational TherapyPhysical TherapistsProgram EvaluationSelf EfficacyStrokeStroke Rehabilitation

Identifiers

PMID30856191
PMCPMC6411258

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.