Title

Staff and volunteers' perceptions of a communication enhanced environment model in an acute/slow stream rehabilitation and a rehabilitation hospital ward: A qualitative description study within a before-and-after pilot study

Author Identifier

Sarah D'Souza

ORCID : 0000-0001-6221-3229

Natalie Ciccone

ORCID : 0000-0002-1822-7217

Deborah Hersh

ORCID : 0000-0003-2466-0225

Elizabeth Armstrong

ORCID : 0000-0003-4469-1117

Erin Godecke

ORCID : 0000-0002-7210-1295

Document Type

Journal Article

Publication Title

Disability and Rehabilitation

Publisher

Taylor & Francis

School

School of Medical and Health Sciences

RAS ID

40573

Funders

Hollywood Private Hospital Research Foundation

Edith Cowan University

Australian Post Graduate Award Scholarship

Comments

D'Souza, S., Ciccone, N., Hersh, D., Janssen, H., Armstrong, E., & Godecke, E. (2021). Staff and volunteers' perceptions of a communication enhanced environment model in an acute/slow stream rehabilitation and a rehabilitation hospital ward: A qualitative description study within a before-and-after pilot study. Disability and Rehabilitation. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2021.1977397

Abstract

Purpose

A lack of social interaction during early stroke recovery can negatively affect neurological recovery and health-related quality of life of patients with aphasia following stroke. A Communication Enhanced Environment (CEE) model was developed to increase patient engagement in language activities early after stroke. This study aimed to examine staff (n = 20) and volunteer (n = 2) perceptions of a CEE model and factors influencing the implementation and use of the model. This study formed part of a broader study that developed and embedded a CEE model on two hospital wards.

Materials and methods

Six focus groups and one interview with hospital staff were conducted and analysed using a qualitative description approach. Feedback emailed by volunteers was included in the data set.

Results

Staff and volunteers perceived the CEE model benefitted themselves, the hospital system and patients. Staff identified a range of factors that influenced the implementation and use of the CEE model including individual staff, volunteer and patient factors, hospital features, the ease with which the CEE model could be used, and the implementation approach.

Conclusions

This study provides valuable insights into staff perceptions which may inform the implementation of interventions and future iterations of a CEE model.

Implications for Rehabilitation

  • A CEE model may promote efficiency and increased patient engagement in stroke rehabilitation.

  • The CEE model information session and aphasia communication partner training, and the provision of resources, may be useful strategies to increase staff confidence in using communication supporting strategies with patients with aphasia.

  • Behaviour change and implementation science strategies may provide a framework to address barriers and promote facilitators to embed hospital-based interventions that require individual, ward, cultural and systems level change to reduce the evidence-based gap in clinical practice.

DOI

10.1080/09638288.2021.1977397

Access Rights

subscription content

Research Themes

Health

Priority Areas

Neuroscience and neurorehabilitation

Share

 
COinS