Clinician experiences with using assistive technology in brain injury rehabilitation: a survey of clinician capability, attitudes, and barriers
Kavya Pilli A * , Brendan Worne B and Grahame Simpson
B C D
A Liverpool Brain Injury Unit,
B Brain Injury Rehabilitation Research Group,
C John Walsh Centre of Rehabilitation Research,
D Faculty of Medicine and Health,
Abstract
The rise in assistive technology (AT) solutions to support people with an acquired brain injury (ABI) has warranted clinicians to build capability in assisting clients to select goal-centred AT. The study explored, amongst ABI clinicians, (a) capability, attitudes, and barriers with AT implementation, (b) age-related differences in technology self-efficacy and capability (c) strategies to support AT use in rehabilitation and (d) thematic analysis of AT-related experiences.
Mixed methods design. Online survey circulated to ABI clinicians across New South Wales, Australia, comprising purpose-designed items as well as the Modified Computer Self-Efficacy Scale (MCSES; range 0–100)
Clinicians (n = 123) were evenly distributed across decadal age groups. The majority were female (90%, n = 111) and one-third were occupational therapists.
Clinicians scored strongly on the MCSES (Mdn = 76, IQR = 19), with younger age groups significantly associated with higher scores (H[3] = 9.667, p = .022). Most clinicians (92%) were knowledgeable of mainstream technology for personal use, but over half (65%) reported insufficient knowledge of suitable AT for clients. Clinicians reported positive attitudes towards AT, however, time to research and develop proficiency with a range of AT was the primary barrier (81%).
Thematic analysis suggested that whilst the ideal AT experience is client-motivated requiring multidisciplinary guidance, the clinician role and experience with AT is evolving, influenced by rapid technological advancement and extrinsic opportunities to access AT.
Whilst clinicians have positive attitudes towards AT, there is a gap in clinician implementation. There is need to support further resources to build clinician capability and access to AT.
Keywords: Acquired brain injury, traumatic brain injury, assistive technology, clinicians, self-efficacy, technology acceptance, rehabilitation, behaviour change.
References
Alashram, A. R., Annino, G., Padua, E., Romagnoli, C., Mercuri, N. B. (2019) Cognitive rehabilitation post traumatic brain injury: A systematic review for emerging use of virtual reality technology. Journal of Clinical Neuroscience 66, 209-219.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Andrew, N. E., Kilkenny, M., Naylor, R., Purvis, T., Lalor, E., Moloczij, N., Cadilhac, D. A. (2014) Understanding long-term unmet needs in Australian survivors of stroke. International Journal of Stroke 9, 106-112.
| Google Scholar |
Atkins, L., Francis, J., Islam, R., O’Connor, D., Patey, A., Ivers, N., Michie, S. (2017) A guide to using the Theoretical Domains Framework of behaviour change to investigate implementation problems. Implementation Science 12(1), 1-18.
| Google Scholar |
Braun, V., Clarke, V. (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 3(2), 77-101.
| Google Scholar |
Brunner, M., Hemsley, B., Togher, L., Palmer, S. (2017) Technology and its role in rehabilitation for people with cognitive-communication disability following a traumatic brain injury (TBI). Brain Injury 31(8), 1028-1043.
| Google Scholar |
Charters, E., Gillett, L., Simpson, G. K. (2015) Efficacy of electronic portable assistive devices for people with acquired brain injury: A systematic review. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation 25(1), 82-121.
| Google Scholar |
Chen, C. C., Bode, R. K. (2011) Factors influencing therapists’ decision-making in the acceptance of new technology devices in stroke rehabilitation. American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation 90(5), 415-425.
| Google Scholar |
Cohen, J. (1992) Statistical power analysis. Current Directions in Psychological Science 1(3), 98-101.
| Google Scholar |
Compeau, D. R., Higgins, C. A. (1995) Computer self-efficacy: Development of a measure and initial test. MIS Quarterly 19(2), 189-211.
| Google Scholar |
Culler, K. H., Wang, Y. C., Byers, K., Trierweiler, R. (2011) Barriers and facilitators of return to work for individuals with strokes: Perspectives of the stroke survivor, vocational specialist, and employer. Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation 18(4), 325-340.
| Google Scholar |
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., Warshaw, P. R. (1989) User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science 35(8), 982-1003.
| Google Scholar |
de Joode, E., van Heugten, C., Verhey, F., van Boxtel, M. (2010) Efficacy and usability of assistive technology for patients with cognitive deficits: A systematic review. Clinical Rehabilitation 24(8), 701-714.
| Google Scholar |
de Joode, E. A., van Boxtel, M. P., Verhey, F. R., van Heugten, C. M. (2012) Use of assistive technology in cognitive rehabilitation: Exploratory studies of the opinions and expectations of healthcare professionals and potential users. Brain Injury 26(10), 1257-1266.
| Google Scholar |
Downing, M., Bragge, P., Ponsford, J. (2019) Cognitive rehabilitation following traumatic brain injury: A survey of current practice in Australia. Brain Impairment 20(1), 24-36.
| Google Scholar |
Gagnon-Roy, M., Bier, N., Couture, M., Giroux, S., Pigot, H., Zarshenas, S., Bottari, C. (2021) Facilitators and obstacles to the use of a cognitive orthosis for meal preparation within the homes of adults with a moderate to severe traumatic brain injury: Informal caregivers and health-care professionals’ perspectives. Assistive Technology 34(3), 281-288.
| Google Scholar |
Gillespie, A., Best, C., O’Neill, B. (2012) Cognitive function and assistive technology for cognition: A systematic review. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society 18(1), 1-19.
| Google Scholar |
Hamilton, C., Lovarini, M., McCluskey, A., Folly de Campos, T., Hassett, L. (2019) Experiences of therapists using feedback-based technology to improve physical function in rehabilitation settings: A qualitative systematic review. Disability and Rehabilitation 41(15), 1739-1750.
| Google Scholar |
Hart, T., O'Neil-Pirozzi, T., Morita, C. (2003) Clinician expectations for portable electronic devices as cognitive-behavioural orthoses in traumatic brain injury rehabilitation. Brain Injury 17(5), 401-411.
| Google Scholar |
Hassett, L., van den Berg, M., Lindley, R. I., Crotty, M., McCluskey, A., van der Ploeg, H. P., Sherrington, C. (2020) Digitally enabled aged care and neurological rehabilitation to enhance outcomes with Activity and MObility UsiNg Technology (AMOUNT) in Australia: A randomised controlled trial. PLoS Medicine 17(2), e1003029.
| Google Scholar |
Ienca, M., Fabrice, J., Elger, B., Caon, M., Scoccia Pappagallo, A., Kressig, R. W., Wangmo, T. (2017) Intelligent assistive technology for Alzheimer’s disease and other dementias: A systematic review. Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease 56(4), 1301-1340.
| Google Scholar |
Jamwal, R., Callaway, L., Ackerl, J., Farnworth, L., Winkler, D. (2017) Electronic assistive technology used by people with acquired brain injury in shared supported accommodation: Implications for occupational therapy. British Journal of Occupational Therapy 80(2), 89-98.
| Google Scholar |
Juengst, S. B., Graham, K. M., Pulantara, I. W., McCue, M., Whyte, E. M., Dicianno, B. E., Wagner, A. K. (2015) Pilot feasibility of an mHealth system for conducting ecological momentary assessment of mood-related symptoms following traumatic brain injury. Brain Injury 29(11), 1351-1361.
| Google Scholar |
Karlsson, P., Johnston, C., Barker, K. (2018) Influences on students’ assistive technology use at school: The views of classroom teachers, allied health professionals, students with cerebral palsy and their parents. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology 13(8), 763-771.
| Google Scholar |
Kelly, M., McDonald, S., Frith, M. H. (2017) Assessment and rehabilitation of social cognition impairment after brain injury: Surveying practices of clinicians. Brain Impairment 18(1), 11-35.
| Google Scholar |
Laver, K., George, S., Ratcliffe, J., Crotty, M. (2012) Measuring technology self-efficacy: Reliability and construct validity of a modified computer self-efficacy scale in a clinical rehabilitation setting. Disability and Rehabilitation 34(3), 220-227.
| Google Scholar |
Leopold, A., Louri, A., Petras, H., Elias, E. (2015) The use of assistive technology for cognition to support the performance of daily activities for individuals with cognitive disabilities due to traumatic brain injury: The current state of research. NeuroRehabilitation 37(3), 359-378.
| Google Scholar |
Lloréns, R., Noé, E., Colomer, C., Alcañiz, M. (2015) Effectiveness, usability, and cost-benefit of a virtual reality–based telerehabilitation program for balance recovery after stroke: A randomized controlled trial. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 96(3), 418-425.
| Google Scholar |
Norup, A., Kruse, M., Soendergaard, P. L., Rasmussen, K. W., Biering-Sørensen, F. (2020) Socioeconomic consequences of traumatic brain injury: A Danish nationwide register-based study. Journal of Neurotrauma 37(24), 2694-2702.
| Google Scholar |
O’Neil-Pirozzi, T. M., Kendrick, H., Goldstein, R., Glenn, M. (2004) Clinician influences on use of portable electronic memory devices in traumatic brain injury rehabilitation. Brain Injury 18(2), 179-189.
| Google Scholar |
Oyesanya, T. O., Thompson, N., Arulselvam, K., Seel, R. T. (2021) Technology and TBI: Perspectives of persons with TBI and their family caregivers on technology solutions to address health, wellness, and safety concerns. Assistive Technology 33(4), 190-200.
| Google Scholar |
Plackett, R., Thomas, S., Thomas, S. (2017) Professionals’ views on the use of smartphone technology to support children and adolescents with memory impairment due to acquired brain injury. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology 12(3), 236-243.
| Google Scholar |
Sabaz, M., Simpson, G. K., Walker, A. J., Rogers, J. M., Gillis, I., Strettles, B. (2014) Prevalence, comorbidities, and correlates of challenging behavior among community-dwelling adults with severe traumatic brain injury: A multicenter study. The Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation 29(2), E19-E30.
| Google Scholar |
Simpson, G. K., McRae, P., Hallab, L., Daher, M., Strettles, B. (2020) Participation in competitive employment after severe traumatic brain injury: New employment versus return to previous (pre-injury) employment. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation 30(6), 995-1012.
| Google Scholar |
Sloan, S., Callaway, L., Winkler, D. (2009) Changes in care and support needs following community-based intervention for individuals with acquired brain injury. Brain Impairment 10(3), 295-306.
| Google Scholar |
Steel, E. J., Layton, N. A., Foster, M. M., Bennett, S. (2016) Challenges of user-centred assistive technology provision in Australia: Shopping without a prescription. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology 11(3), 235-240.
| Google Scholar |
Tate, R. L., Lane-Brown, A. T., Myles, B. M., Cameron, I. D. (2020) A longitudinal study of support needs after severe traumatic brain injury. Brain Injury 34(8), 991-1000.
| Google Scholar |
Thompson, H. S., Ryan, A. (2009) The impact of stroke consequences on spousal relationships from the perspective of the person with stroke. Journal of Clinical Nursing 18(12), 1803-1811.
| Google Scholar |
Vaezipour, A., Whelan, B. M., Wall, K., Theodoros, D. (2019) Acceptance of rehabilitation technology in adults with moderate to severe traumatic brain injury, their caregivers, and healthcare professionals: A systematic review. The Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation 34(4), E67-E82.
| Google Scholar |
Wong, D., Sinclair, K., Seabrook, E., Mckay, A., Ponsford, J. (2017) Smartphones as assistive technology following traumatic brain injury: A preliminary study of what helps and what hinders. Disability and Rehabilitation 39(23), 2387-2394.
| Google Scholar |
World Health Organization (2021). Assistive technology. Retrieved from https://www.who.int/teams/health-product-policy-and-standards/assistive-and-medical-technology/assistive-technologyhttps://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/assistive-technology
Zarshenas, S., Gagnon-Roy, M., Couture, M., Bier, N., Giroux, S., Nalder, E., Canadian Traumatic Brain Injury Research Consortium (2020) Potential of using an assistive technology to address meal preparation difficulties following acquired brain injury: Clients’ and caregivers’ perspectives. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology 1-9.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
