Search

To describe the amount, range, and key characteristics (e.g., publication years, methods, topics) of the person-centered rehabilitation literature in adults with physical impairments. Following the published scoping review protocol, papers were identified through: three major databases, snowball searches and expert consultation. Two independent reviewers have identified English-language papers on adult person-centered rehabilitation according to six pre-defined inclusion categories – theoretical, quantitative and qualitive research papers are included; and then have extracted their key characteristics (e.g., aims, methods, participants). Descriptive statistics, regression and content analyses were used to synthesize the results. Of 5912 deduplicated records initially screened, 170 papers were included: 136 empirical, including 13 systematic reviews. Empirical papers had data from 15264 clients and 4098 providers, in total. Yearly publications grew significantly from 2009 to 2018 (r2 = 0.71; b = 1.98: p < 0.01). Publications were unevenly distributed by countries (e.g., United States' publications per population was 44 times lower than New Zealand's). Most papers focused in more than one profession, setting-type or health conditions. Finally, many empirical papers (n = 67) studied implementation of person-centered rehabilitation approaches, including its effect. This scoping review synthesizes key characteristics and publication trends in the person-centered rehabilitation literature on adults with physical impairments, a growing but unchartered territory thus far. This large and diverse body of literature can ground further person-centered rehabilitation practices and research, including toward building a transdisciplinary, trans-service model of person-centered rehabilitation. The person-centered rehabilitation literature on adults with physical impairments, especially the empirical one, has been growing significantly over time, despite inequitably distributed per countries. Rehabilitation stakeholders, including practitioners, have a growing amount of literature in which they can rely for the operationalization and implementation of person-centered rehabilitation approaches into routine practice. Based on our work, person-centered rehabilitation emerges as a practice requirement that cuts across professional and other rehabilitation silos. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

AbstractPurposeMethodsResultsConclusions\nIMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONRehabilitation plays a critical role in minimising disability after stroke, with the concept of “challenge” proposed to be essential to rehabilitation efficacy and outcomes. This review unpacks how challenge is conceptualised in stroke rehabilitation literature from the perspectives of physiotherapy, occupational therapy, speech-language therapy and people with stroke. A secondary purpose was to provide a definition of challenge that is applicable to stroke rehabilitation.Principle-based concept analysis was utilised to examine challenge within the stroke rehabilitation literature. Forty-two papers were included. Data analysis involved immersion, analytical questioning, coding and synthesis to elicit the conceptual components of challenge.Challenge was understood as a multidimensional and dynamic concept with three facets: nominal, functional and perceived challenge. Functional and perceived challenge were integral to optimal challenge. Optimal challenge was central to enhancing the outcomes and experiences of people with stroke, in rehabilitation and everyday life.Challenge is a key concept which, when carefully optimised to the person’s ability and experience, may positively influence their learning, recovery and engagement after stroke. This review lays a conceptual foundation for better understanding, operationalisation and advancement of challenge, offering important implications for addressing the growing burden of stroke disability, through rehabilitation.Challenge involves a multifaceted, multidimensional and dynamic interaction between the task, the person’s ability and their subjective experience.The therapist and the person’s perspective should collectively shape the process of co-creating a challenge that is truly optimal for the person.Therapists should consider both functional and perceived approaches to operationalising challenge with the person.Challenge involves a multifaceted, multidimensional and dynamic interaction between the task, the person’s ability and their subjective experience.The therapist and the person’s perspective should collectively shape the process of co-creating a challenge that is truly optimal for the person.Therapists should consider both functional and perceived approaches to operationalising challenge with the person. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Therapeutic relationships are fundamental in aphasia rehabilitation, influencing patient experience and outcomes. While we have good understandings of the components of therapeutic relationships, there has been little exploration of how and why therapists construct and enact relationships as they do. Sociological theories may help develop nuanced understanding of the values, assumptions and structures that influence practice, and may facilitate critical reflexivity on practice. Aims: To explore the potential for theoretical approaches from outside speech–language therapy to enable a deeper understanding of the nature and enactment of therapeutic relationships in aphasia rehabilitation. Methods & Procedures: An explanatory single case study of one speech–language therapist–patient dyad in an in‐patient stroke rehabilitation setting. Data included observations of five interactions, two interviews with the client and three interviews with the speech–language therapist. Analysis was guided by analytical pluralism that applied aspects of three sociological theories to guide data analysis and make visible the contextual factors that surround, shape and permeate the enactment of therapeutic relationships. Outcomes & Results: The analysis of this dyad made visible individual, interactional and broader structural features that illustrate the dynamic processes that practitioners and patients undertake to enact therapeutic relationships. Clinical practice could be viewed as a performance with each person continually negotiating how they convey different impressions to others, which shapes what work is valued and foregrounded. The patient and therapist took up or were placed in different positions within the interactions, each with associated expectations and rights, which influenced what types of relationships could, or were likely to, develop. Organizational, rehabilitation and individual practitioner structures assigned rules and boundaries that shaped how the therapist developed and enacted the therapeutic relationship. Whilst the therapist had some agency in her work and could resist the different influencing factors, such resistance was constrained because these structures had become highly internalized and routinized and was not always visible to the therapist. Conclusions & Implications: While therapists commonly value therapeutic relationships, social and structural factors consciously and unconsciously influence their ability to prioritize relational work. Sociological theories can provide new lenses on our practice that can assist therapists to be critically reflexive about practice, and to enact changes to how they work to enhance therapeutic relationships with clients. What this paper addsWhat is already known on the subjectTherapeutic relationships are critical in aphasia rehabilitation. We have a good understanding of the different components of therapeutic relationships and how relationships are perceived by patients and practitioners.What this paper adds to existing knowledgeThis study is novel in its use of sociological lenses to explore contexts and complexities inherent in building and maintaining therapeutic relationships. These are often invisible to the practitioner but can have a significant impact on how relational work is enacted and what forms of relationship are possible.What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?This study will support clinicians to critically reflect on how they enact therapeutic relationships and may enhance awareness of the often‐hidden factors which influence the ways in which they work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While discussions on patient engagement commonly focus on patient behaviors, a small body of research highlights the patient-practitioner relationship as critical in engagement. Understanding this relationship might be facilitated through a relationally-oriented methodology. The Voice Centred Relational Approach is one such qualitative methodology. Within this paper, we present one turn in a long conversation about this methodology. Drawing on our longitudinal observational study of engagement practices in stroke rehabilitation in New Zealand, we explicate how a theoretical framework can inform how the Voice Centred Relational Approach is enacted in the research process, from entering the field to dissemination. We detail how we adapted the associated analytic techniques (the Listening Guide and i-poems) for use with multiple forms and sources of data. We propose that the underlying relational ontology and relational orientation of this methodology makes it a useful approach in researching relational practice in healthcare. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To explore how practitioner engagement and disengagement occurred, and how these may influence patient care and engagement. Design: A qualitative study using the Voice Centred Relational Methodology. Data included interviews, focus groups and observations. Setting: Inpatient and community stroke rehabilitation services. Subjects: Eleven people experiencing communication disability after stroke and 42 rehabilitation practitioners. Interventions: Not applicable. Results: The practitioner’s engagement was important in patient engagement and service delivery. When patients considered practitioners were engaged, this helped engagement. When they considered practitioners were not engaged, their engagement was negatively affected. Practitioners considered their engagement was important but complex. It influenced how they worked and how they perceived the patient. Disengagement was taboo. It arose when not feeling confident, when not positively impacting outcomes, or when having an emotional response to a patient or interaction. Each party’s engagement influenced the other, suggesting it was co-constructed. Conclusions: Practitioner engagement influenced patient engagement in stroke rehabilitation. Practitioner disengagement was reported by most practitioners but was often a source of shame. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: In this paper, we critically investigate the implementation of person-centered care with the purpose of advancing philosophical debates regarding the overarching aims and delivery of rehabilitation. While general agreement exists regarding person centered care's core principles, how practitioners reconcile the implementation of these principles with competing practice demands remains an open question. Materials and methods: For the paper, we drew on post-qualitative methods to engage in a process of "diffractive" analysis wherein we analyzed the micro-doings of person-centered care in everyday rehabilitation work. Working from our team members' diverse experiences, traditions, and epistemological commitments, we engaged with data from nine "care events" generated in previous research to interrogate the multiple forces that co-produce care practices. Results: We map our analyses under three categories: scripts mediate practice, securing compliance through "benevolent manipulations", and care(ful) tinkering. In the latter, we explore the notion of tinkering as a useful concept for approaching person centered care. Uncertainty, humility, and doubt in one's expertise are inherent to tinkering, which involves a continual questioning of what to do, what is best, and what is person centered care within each moment of care. The paper concludes with a discussion of the implications for rehabilitation and person-centered care. Determinations of what constitutes good, better, or best rehabilitation practices are inevitably questions of ethics. Person-centered care is promoted as good practice in rehabilitation because it provides a framework for attending to the personhood of all engaged in clinical encounters. Post-critical analyses suggest that multiple interacting forces, conditions, assumptions, and actions intersect in shaping each rehabilitation encounter such that what constitutes good care or person-centered care cannot be determined in advance. "Tinkering" is a potentially useful approach that involves a continual questioning of what to do, what is best, and what is person-centered care within each moment of care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]