This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Pollock, A. S Articles by Sellars, C. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Pollock, A. S Articles by Sellars, C. Pubmed/NCBI databases Medline Plus Health Information Stroke Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Barriers to achieving evidence-based stroke rehabilitation

Lynn Legg

Peter Langhorne

Cameron Sellars

Stroke Therapy Evaluation Programme (STEP), Glasgow Royal Infirmary, Glasgow

Objective: To determine the perceived barriers to evidence-based practice by health professionals working within the field of stroke rehabilitation.

Design: Focus groups were carried out to identify the perceived barriers; these were followed by a postal questionnaire that asked stroke rehabilitation professionals to rate their agreement with the perceived barriers.

Subjects: One hundred and five stroke rehabilitation professionals participated in the focus groups and were sent the postal questionnaire. Eighty-six responses were returned, from 27 physiotherapists, 26 occupational therapists, 22 nurses, 6 speech and language therapists, and 5 other professionals.

Main outcome measures: Proportion of subjects rating their level of agreement with statements as 1 ‘agree’, 2, 3, 4 or 5 ‘disagree’. Scores of 1 or 2 were classified as ‘agreement’, and scores of 4 or 5 were classified as ‘disagreement’: the percentages of subjects agreeing or disagreeing with each statement were calculated.

Results: Twenty barriers were identified, classified under the headings ‘ability’, ‘opportunity’ and ‘implementation’. Seventy-nine (92%) of all respondents agreed that keeping up to date with research findings was important to them, but only 7 (8%) were happy with the time that they had to do this. Fifty-eight (67%) perceived a need for further training. Only 4 (5%) agreed that it was easy to transfer research findings into their daily practice. A number of significant differences were found between the perceived barriers of different disciplines.

Clinical Rehabilitation, Vol. 14, No. 6, 611-617 (2000)
DOI: 10.1191/0269215500cr369oa


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. Tyson and L. Connell The psychometric properties and clinical utility of measures of walking and mobility in neurological conditions: a systematic review Clinical Rehabilitation, November 1, 2009; 23(11): 1018 - 1033. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R. Van Peppen, M. Schuurmans, E. Stutterheim, E. Lindeman, and N. Van Meeteren Promoting the use of outcome measures by an educational programme for physiotherapists in stroke rehabilitation: a pilot randomized controlled trial Clinical Rehabilitation, November 1, 2009; 23(11): 1005 - 1017. [Abstract] [PDF]

				N. M. Salbach, S. J.T. Guilcher, S. B. Jaglal, and D. A. Davis Factors Influencing Information Seeking by Physical Therapists Providing Stroke Management Physical Therapy, October 1, 2009; 89(10): 1039 - 1050. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. Tyson and L. Connell How to measure balance in clinical practice. A systematic review of the psychometrics and clinical utility of measures of balance activity for neurological conditions Clinical Rehabilitation, September 1, 2009; 23(9): 824 - 840. [Abstract] [PDF]

				L. Wevers, I. van de Port, M. Vermue, G. Mead, and G. Kwakkel Effects of Task-Oriented Circuit Class Training on Walking Competency After Stroke: A Systematic Review Stroke, July 1, 2009; 40(7): 2450 - 2459. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				N. M. Salbach, P. Veinot, S. Rappolt, M. Bayley, D. Burnett, M. Judd, and S. B. Jaglal Physical Therapists' Experiences Updating the Clinical Management of Walking Rehabilitation After Stroke: A Qualitative Study Physical Therapy, June 1, 2009; 89(6): 556 - 568. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				N. M Salbach, S. B Jaglal, N. Korner-Bitensky, S. Rappolt, and D. Davis Practitioner and Organizational Barriers to Evidence-based Practice of Physical Therapists for People With Stroke Physical Therapy, October 1, 2007; 87(10): 1284 - 1303. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]