Hand therapists' attitudes, environmental supports, and self-efficacy regarding intimate partner violence in their practice

How is range of motion of the fingers measured in hand therapy practice? A survey study

Introduction

A variety of techniques for measuring finger range of motion (ROM) are available for hand therapist use, however, there is no clear description of which finger ROM methods are preferred in practice. This study explored the preferred measurement techniques, the factors influencing clinical decision-making, and the clinical reasoning processes employed when faced with practice-based measurement scenarios.

Methods

This was a cross-sectional online survey study of hand therapists and American or Canadian Society of Hand Therapists members. Quantitative methods were employed for participant demographics and categorical clinical questions about practice patterns. Qualitative descriptive questions and vignettes were analysed using inductive and deductive content analysis, respectively.

Results

Four hundred and eighty-one responses were included, representing hand therapists with a median age of 51 years and median experience of 19 years. Participants preferred measuring individual joints with a goniometer (N = 210, 44%) for perceived utility in informing treatment decisions, reliability, and confidence in measurement skills. Participants also preferred active functional ROM (N = 117, 24%) for being quick, easy, and useful in informing treatment decisions. Participants reported using different methods with time constraints in a busy clinic, taking precautions with pins/wounds, bulky dressings/casts, pain tolerance levels of patients, or with specific pathologies. Participants' responses to the multi-stage vignette identified distinct patterns of clinical reasoning approaches within individual vignettes.

Conclusions

Hand therapists use multiple methods to measure finger ROM while preferring to use goniometers to measure individual finger joints. They engage procedural and pragmatic reasoning modified by contextual factors when measuring finger ROM.

Exploring the Relationships Between Rehabilitation and Survivors of Intimate Partner Violence: A Scoping Review

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a public health crisis affecting one in three women and one in ten men in their lifetimes. Rehabilitation professionals are highly likely to encounter survivors of IPV in their practice; yet, there exists no formal review assessing the relationship between IPV and rehabilitation. Our objective was to understand the types and contexts of rehabilitation care currently available for survivors of IPV, opportunities identified in the literature for rehabilitation care, and IPV awareness and education among rehabilitation providers. A search strategy related to IPV and four rehabilitation professionals of interest (occupational therapy, physiotherapy, speech-language pathology/therapy, and physiatry) was developed across 10 databases and complemented by a gray literature search. Two reviewers independently assessed articles for inclusion. In all, 44 articles met inclusion criteria, ranging from primary research articles (48%) to clinical newsletters. Included articles predominantly focused on opportunities for rehabilitation care (68%) and occupational therapists as a profession (68%). A minority of studies examined specific interventions for IPV survivors (18%) or assessed for knowledge and attitudes about IPV (16%) among rehabilitation professionals. To our knowledge, this is the first scoping review exploring the rehabilitation literature for IPV survivors. These findings show an awareness of IPV among rehabilitation professionals, the importance of identifying IPV in clients, and the ways in which rehabilitation professionals are uniquely situated to support survivors of IPV. There remains an opportunity to explore interventions designed specifically for IPV survivors.