Patient and Clinician Perspectives on Quality-of-Care Topics for Users of Custom Ankle-Foot Orthoses

Priorities when designing a service-focused delivery model for mobility devices: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Throughout the world, mobility devices are usually distributed using product-based business models, where a device is provided to a user, and serviced or replaced when the user returns to the clinic with an issue. Moving to a service-based business model can provide continuous and customised support for the user, and provide the clinicians and manufacturers with better data to base their decisions on. This study reviews papers on assistive technology service-based business models and considerations in designing such a model to optimise economic and social value. It then applies the findings to the mobility device space.

METHOD

A systematic literature search was undertaken in PubMed, Web of Science, and OVID databases to analyse studies that discuss service delivery models used to provide assistive products. Inductive thematic analysis determined the themes, facilitators and barriers associated with providing a service. Findings were applied to mobility device service provision.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

Themes from the 29 relevant papers were grouped into four categories: Access (affordability/availability/education), Utility (customisability/usability/adaptability), Integrity (quality/sustainability/impact), and Compliance (policy/privacy/security). The most common themes were customisability, affordability, availability, and education. There is a need for service-based delivery models to replace conventional product-based models, and many considerations to optimise their design. No publications discussed the design and implementation of a service-based model for mobility device provision that uses modern sensors, software and other digital technologies to optimise the service. Service-based models that use modern digital technologies are new for the mobility device field, but much can be learnt from other fields.

Identifying Instruments to Assess Care Quality for Individuals With Custom Ankle Foot Orthoses: A Scoping Review

OBJECTIVES

We conducted 2 complementary scoping reviews to identify instruments that assess the experience and outcomes of custom ankle-foot orthosis (AFO) care in individuals with neurologic and traumatic conditions and to determine to what extent they might be psychometrically sound for AFO users. A stakeholder advisory committee considered to what extent the identified and psychometrically sound instruments might be feasible for use in developing quality measures for custom AFO users.

DATA SOURCES

Both scoping reviews were conducted using PubMed, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Embase, and Cochrane Systematic Reviews. The following were used for the first scoping review only: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and the Physiotherapy Evidence Database.

STUDY SELECTION

The initial scoping review yielded 79 articles with 82 instruments, 16 of which were used in 4 or more studies. The second scoping review yielded 57 articles reporting psychometric properties.

DATA EXTRACTION

Psychometric properties for populations who use AFOs were summarized for 15 of the 16 instruments. The advisory committee eliminated 2 insrtruments, noted overlap between 4 instruments in terms of the constructs measured, and suggested 6 potential contemporary substitutes.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Most instruments assessed activity (specifically mobility) and pertained to the National Quality Forum domain of "Health-Related Quality of Life." The 10-meter walk test, 6-minute walk test, Berg Balance Scale, Timed Up and Go, and Rivermead Mobility Index were reported to have adequate reliability and validity, and were considered feasible for administration in a clinical setting.

CONCLUSIONS

Complementary scoping reviews demonstrated that some instruments with reasonable psychometric properties are available that are feasible to use in developing quality measures for custom AFO care. However, experience of care instruments suitable for this population were not identified but are needed for a comprehensive evaluation of care quality for AFO users.