Correction to: Differences in factors influencing the use of eRehabilitation after stroke; a cross-sectional comparison between Brazilian and Dutch healthcare professionals
| Autor: | Lucia Willadino Braga, Thea P. M. Vliet Vlieland, Berber Brouns, Leti van Bodegom-Vos, Lígia M. N. Souza, Ingrid L. C. Gil, Arend J. de Kloet, Jorit J. L. Meesters |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2020 |
| Předmět: |
Adult
Male medicine.medical_specialty Attitude of Health Personnel Health Personnel medicine.medical_treatment Rehabilitation Centers Health informatics Health administration Likert scale Health care Aphasia Humans Medicine Qualitative Research Netherlands Response rate (survey) Rehabilitation Descriptive statistics business.industry lcsh:Public aspects of medicine Health Policy Nursing research Stroke Rehabilitation Correction lcsh:RA1-1270 Focus Groups Middle Aged Telemedicine Cross-Sectional Studies Health Care Surveys Family medicine Female business Brazil |
| Zdroj: | BMC Health Services Research, Vol 20, Iss 1, Pp 1-2 (2020) BMC Health Services Research |
| ISSN: | 1472-6963 |
| DOI: | 10.1186/s12913-020-05457-2 |
| Popis: | To improve the use of eRehabilitation after stroke, the identification of barriers and facilitators influencing this use in different healthcare contexts around the world is needed. Therefore, this study aims to investigate differences and similarities in factors influencing the use of eRehabilitation after stroke among Brazilian Healthcare Professionals (BHP) and Dutch Healthcare Professionals (DHP). A cross-sectional survey study including 88 statements about factors related to the use of eRehabilitation (4-point Likert scale; 1–4; unimportant-important/disagree-agree). The survey was conducted among BHP and DHP (physical therapists, rehabilitating physicians and psychologists). Descriptive statistics were used to analyse differences and similarities in factors influencing the use of eRehabilitation. ninety-nine (response rate 30%) BHP and 105 (response rate 37%) DHP participated. Differences were found in the top-10 most influencing statements between BHP and DHP BHP rated the following factors as most important: sufficient support from the organisation (e.g. the rehabilitation centre) concerning resources and time, and potential benefits of the use of eRehabilitation for the patient. DHP rated the feasibility of the use of eRehabilitation for the patient (e.g. a helpdesk and good instructions) as most important for effective uptake. Top-10 least important statements were mostly similar; both BHP and DHP rated problems caused by stroke (e.g. aphasia or cognitive problems) or problems with resources (e.g. hardware and software) as least important for the uptake of eRehabilitation. The results indicate that the use of eRehabilitation after stroke by BHP and DHP is influenced by different factors. A tailored implementation strategy for both countries needs to be developed. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
Full text from SpringerLink