Deans' stroke musings: How Can We Use the Promoting Action on Research in Health Services (PARIHS) Framework to Move from What We Know to What We Should Do for the Rehabilitation of a Painful Hemiplegic Shoulder (PHS)?

Changing stroke rehab and research worldwide now.Time is Brain! trillions and trillions of neurons that DIE each day because there are NO effective hyperacute therapies besides tPA(only 12% effective). I have 523 posts on hyperacute therapy, enough for researchers to spend decades proving them out. These are my personal ideas and blog on stroke rehabilitation and stroke research. Do not attempt any of these without checking with your medical provider. Unless you join me in agitating, when you need these therapies they won't be there.

What this blog is for:

My blog is not to help survivors recover, it is to have the 10 million yearly stroke survivors light fires underneath their doctors, stroke hospitals and stroke researchers to get stroke solved. 100% recovery. The stroke medical world is completely failing at that goal, they don't even have it as a goal. Shortly after getting out of the hospital and getting NO information on the process or protocols of stroke rehabilitation and recovery I started searching on the internet and found that no other survivor received useful information. This is an attempt to cover all stroke rehabilitation information that should be readily available to survivors so they can talk with informed knowledge to their medical staff. It lays out what needs to be done to get stroke survivors closer to 100% recovery. It's quite disgusting that this information is not available from every stroke association and doctors group.

Tuesday, December 13, 2022

How Can We Use the Promoting Action on Research in Health Services (PARIHS) Framework to Move from What We Know to What We Should Do for the Rehabilitation of a Painful Hemiplegic Shoulder (PHS)?

So you really know nothing about recovering a painful hemiplegic shoulder.

How Can We Use the Promoting Action on Research in Health Services (PARIHS) Framework to Move from What We Know to What We Should Do for the Rehabilitation of a Painful Hemiplegic Shoulder (PHS)?

Authors Alatawi SF

Received 6 October 2022

Accepted for publication 6 December 2022

Published 14 December 2022 Volume 2022:15 Pages 2831—2843

DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/JMDH.S392376

Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single anonymous peer review

Peer reviewer comments 2

Editor who approved publication: Dr Scott Fraser

Download Article [PDF]

Salem F Alatawi

Department of Physical Therapy, Faculty of Applied Medical Sciences, University of Tabuk, Tabuk City, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

Correspondence: Salem F Alatawi, Email sfalatawi@ut.edu.sa

Introduction: Several theoretical frameworks currently promote the evidence-based clinical practice. One of these is Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS) framework. However, The PARIHS framework emphasizes the use and implementation of pre-existing knowledge. This study aims to integrate of PARIHS conceptual framework to categorize evidence, context, and facilitation elements for the successful implementation of evidence-based painful hemiplegic shoulder (PHS) rehabilitation.
Methods: Stroke therapists (n=21) were interviewed to elicit important PHS rehabilitation concepts. Following that, a consensus approach was undertaken to tailor PHS recommendations to the local context. All consensus recommendations have been included in the PARIHS framework. The consensus level was set at 75% or more.
Results: The interviews revealed four broad themes of PHS rehabilitation, each further subdivided. Based on the themes and subthemes, 74 recommendations were deemed pertinent to PSH rehabilitation from a reliable source. Out of 74 recommendations, 63 recommendations reach the consensus level for PHS practice. Secondary prevention of PHS (n=10), assessment (n=14), PHS care management (n=19), and service delivery (n=20). A consensus was not reached for the remaining 11 recommendations. Each recommended guideline was integrated into the appropriate element of the PARIHS framework as follows: evidence (28), context (18), and facilitation (17).
Discussion: The findings showed how the PARIHS framework has been configured to empirically support the implementation of robust stroke rehabilitation recommendations in the field of rehabilitation. Using an implementation intervention theory (for example, PARIHS) as a guide, provide a thorough picture of the many levels that may affect implementation requirements.
Conclusion: Many prior studies on evidence-based stroke rehabilitation in physical therapy practice lacked knowledge of translation theories. This result illustrates how to use an intervention implementation (such as PARIHS) to enhance evidence-based practice implementation in routine stroke rehabilitation. Further study is required for the clinical use of the PARIHS framework.