Cohen Laura, Greer Nancy, Berliner Elise, Sprigle Stephen
Rehabilitation Technology Consultants, LLC , Arlington, VA , USA .
Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2013 Nov;8(6):462-71. doi: 10.3109/17483107.2013.823577. Epub 2013 Aug 14.
This article, developed as background content for discussion during the Mobility Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center State of the Science Conference, reviews research surrounding wheeled mobility and seating (WMS) service delivery, discusses the challenges of improving clinical decision-making, and discusses research approaches used to study and improve health services in other practice areas that might be leveraged to develop the evidence base for WMS.
Narrative literature review.
An overview of existing research found general agreement across models of WMS service delivery but little high quality evidence to support the recommended approaches and few studies of the relationship between service delivery steps and individual patient outcomes. The definition of successful clinical decision-making is different for different stakeholders. Clinical decision-making should incorporate the best available evidence along with patient values, preferences, circumstances, and clinical expertise. To advance the evidence base for WMS service delivery, alternatives to randomized controlled trials should be considered and reliable and valid outcome measures developed. Technological advances offer tremendous opportunities for individuals with complex rehabilitation technology needs. However, with ongoing scrutiny of WMS service delivery there is an increased need for evidence to support the clinical decision-making process and to support evidence-based coverage policies for WMS services and technologies.
An evidence base for wheeled mobility and seating services is an important component of the clinical decision-making process. At present, there is little evidence regarding essential components of the wheeled mobility and seating evaluation or the relationship between the evaluation process and patient outcomes. Many factors can confound this relationship and present challenges to research in this area. All stakeholders (i.e. clinicians, rehabilitation technology suppliers, manufacturers, researchers, payers, policy makers, and wheelchair users) need to work together to develop and support an evidence base for wheeled mobility and seating service delivery.
本文作为移动康复工程研究中心科学现状会议讨论的背景内容,回顾了围绕轮式移动和座椅(WMS)服务提供的研究,讨论了改善临床决策的挑战,并探讨了在其他实践领域用于研究和改善健康服务的研究方法,这些方法可能有助于为WMS建立证据基础。
叙述性文献综述。
对现有研究的概述发现,WMS服务提供模式之间存在普遍共识,但几乎没有高质量证据支持推荐的方法,并且关于服务提供步骤与个体患者结果之间关系的研究很少。不同利益相关者对成功临床决策的定义不同。临床决策应结合最佳可得证据以及患者的价值观、偏好、情况和临床专业知识。为了推进WMS服务提供的证据基础,应考虑随机对照试验的替代方法,并开发可靠且有效的结果测量方法。技术进步为有复杂康复技术需求的个人提供了巨大机会。然而,随着对WMS服务提供的持续审查,越来越需要证据来支持临床决策过程,并支持WMS服务和技术的循证覆盖政策。
轮式移动和座椅服务的证据基础是临床决策过程的重要组成部分。目前,关于轮式移动和座椅评估的基本组成部分或评估过程与患者结果之间的关系几乎没有证据。许多因素可能混淆这种关系,并给该领域的研究带来挑战。所有利益相关者(即临床医生、康复技术供应商、制造商、研究人员、付款人、政策制定者和轮椅使用者)需要共同努力,为轮式移动和座椅服务提供建立和支持证据基础。