Critical physiotherapy: a ten-year retrospective

Critical physiotherapy has been a rapidly expanding field over the last decade and could now justifiably be called a professional sub-discipline. In this paper we define three different but somewhat interconnected critical positions that have emerged over the last decade that share a critique of physiotherapy's historical approach to health and illness, while also diverging in the possibilities for new forms of practice and thinking. These three positions broadly align with three distinctive philosophies: approaches that emphasize lived experience, social theory, and a range of philosophies increasingly referred to as the "posts". In this paper we discuss the origins of these approaches, exploring the ways they critique contemporary physiotherapy thinking and practice. We offer an overview of the key principles of each approach and, for each in turn, suggest readings from key authors. We conclude each section by discussing the limits of these various approaches, but also indicate ways in which they might inform future thinking and practice. We end the paper by arguing that the various approaches that now fall under the rubric of critical physiotherapy represent some of the most exciting and opportune ways we might (re)think the future for the physiotherapy profession and the physical therapies more generally.

Supporting Collaboration in Rehabilitation Trajectories With Information and Communication Technologies: Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Despite a surge in health information and communication technology (ICT), there is little evidence of lowered cost or increased quality of care. ICT may support patients, health care providers, and other stakeholders through complex rehabilitation trajectories by offering digital platforms for collaboration, shared decision-making, and safe storage of data. Yet, the questions on how ICT can become a useful tool and how the complex intersection between producers and users of ICT should be solved are challenging.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to review the literature on how ICTs are used to foster collaboration among the patient, the provider, and other stakeholders.

METHODS

This scoping review follows the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines. Studies were identified by searching MEDLINE (OVID), Embase (OVID), CINAHL (EBSCOhost), AMED (EBSCOhost), and Scopus. Unpublished studies were extracted from OAIster, Bielefeld Academic Search Engine, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, NARIC, and Google Scholar. Eligible papers addressed or described a remote dialogue between stakeholders using ICT to address goals and means, provide decision support, or evaluate certain treatment modalities within a rehabilitation context. Due to the rapid development of ICTs, searches included studies published in the period of 2018-2022.

RESULTS

In total, 3206 papers (excluding duplicates) were screened. Three papers met all inclusion criteria. The papers varied in design, key findings, and key challenges. These 3 studies reported outcomes such as improvements in activity performance, participation, frequency of leaving the house, improved self-efficacy, change in patients' perspective on possibilities, and change in professionals' understanding of patients' priorities. However, a misfit between the participants' needs and the technology offered, complexity and lack of availability of the technology, difficulties with implementation and uptake, and lack of flexibility in setup and maintenance reduced the value of ICT for those involved in the studies. The low number of included papers is probably due to the complexity of remote collaboration with ICT.

CONCLUSIONS

ICT has the potential to facilitate communication among stakeholders in the complex and collaborative context of rehabilitation trajectories. This scoping review indicates that there is a paucity of research considering remote ICT-supported collaboration in health care and rehabilitation trajectories. Furthermore, current ICT builds on eHealth literacy, which may differ among stakeholders, and the lack of sufficient eHealth literacy and ICT knowledge creates barriers for access to health care and rehabilitation. Lastly, the aim and results of this review are probably most relevant in high-income countries.