Development and validation of Australian aphasia rehabilitation best practice statements using the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method.

Power, E; Thomas, E; Worrall, L; Rose, M; Togher, L; Nickels, L; Hersh, D; Godecke, E; O'Halloran, R; Lamont, S; O'Connor, C; Clarke, K

Development and validation of Australian aphasia rehabilitation best practice statements using the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method.

Power, E

Thomas, E Worrall, L Rose, M Togher, L Nickels, L Hersh, D Godecke, E O'Halloran, R Lamont, S O'Connor, C Clarke, K

Permalink

Publisher:: BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: BMJ Open, 2015, 5, (7), pp. e007641
Issue Date:: 2015-07-02

Open Access

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Open Access

This item is open access.

Adobe PDF

Download Published versionAdobe PDF (1.98 MB)

View on publisher's site

View statistics

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Power, E https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2638-0406
dc.contributor.author	Thomas, E
dc.contributor.author	Worrall, L
dc.contributor.author	Rose, M
dc.contributor.author	Togher, L
dc.contributor.author	Nickels, L
dc.contributor.author	Hersh, D
dc.contributor.author	Godecke, E
dc.contributor.author	O'Halloran, R
dc.contributor.author	Lamont, S
dc.contributor.author	O'Connor, C
dc.contributor.author	Clarke, K
dc.date.accessioned	2022-11-30T02:52:15Z
dc.date.available	2022-11-30T02:52:15Z
dc.date.issued	2015-07-02
dc.identifier.citation	BMJ Open, 2015, 5, (7), pp. e007641
dc.identifier.issn	2044-6055
dc.identifier.issn	2044-6055
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/163879
dc.description.abstract	OBJECTIVES: To develop and validate a national set of best practice statements for use in post-stroke aphasia rehabilitation. DESIGN: Literature review and statement validation using the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method (RAM). PARTICIPANTS: A national Community of Practice of over 250 speech pathologists, researchers, consumers and policymakers developed a framework consisting of eight areas of care in aphasia rehabilitation. This framework provided the structure for the development of a care pathway containing aphasia rehabilitation best practice statements. Nine speech pathologists with expertise in aphasia rehabilitation participated in two rounds of RAND/UCLA appropriateness ratings of the statements. Panellists consisted of researchers, service managers, clinicians and policymakers. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Statements that achieved a high level of agreement and an overall median score of 7-9 on a nine-point scale were rated as 'appropriate'. RESULTS: 74 best practice statements were extracted from the literature and rated across eight areas of care (eg, receiving the right referrals, providing intervention). At the end of Round 1, 71 of the 74 statements were rated as appropriate, no statements were rated as inappropriate, and three statements were rated as uncertain. All 74 statements were then rated again in the face-to-face second round. 16 statements were added through splitting existing items or adding new statements. Seven statements were deleted leaving 83 statements. Agreement was reached for 82 of the final 83 statements. CONCLUSIONS: This national set of 82 best practice statements across eight care areas for the rehabilitation of people with aphasia is the first to be validated by an expert panel. These statements form a crucial component of the Australian Aphasia Rehabilitation Pathway (AARP) (http://www.aphasiapathway.com.au) and provide the basis for more consistent implementation of evidence-based practice in stroke rehabilitation.
dc.format	Electronic
dc.language	eng
dc.publisher	BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
dc.relation.ispartof	BMJ Open
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1136/bmjopen-2015-007641
dc.rights	info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.subject	1103 Clinical Sciences, 1117 Public Health and Health Services, 1199 Other Medical and Health Sciences
dc.subject.mesh	Aphasia
dc.subject.mesh	Australia
dc.subject.mesh	Delphi Technique
dc.subject.mesh	Evidence-Based Practice
dc.subject.mesh	Humans
dc.subject.mesh	Practice Guidelines as Topic
dc.subject.mesh	Speech-Language Pathology
dc.subject.mesh	Humans
dc.subject.mesh	Aphasia
dc.subject.mesh	Speech-Language Pathology
dc.subject.mesh	Delphi Technique
dc.subject.mesh	Australia
dc.subject.mesh	Practice Guidelines as Topic
dc.subject.mesh	Evidence-Based Practice
dc.title	Development and validation of Australian aphasia rehabilitation best practice statements using the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method.
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	5
utslib.location.activity	England
utslib.for	1103 Clinical Sciences
utslib.for	1117 Public Health and Health Services
utslib.for	1199 Other Medical and Health Sciences
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Health
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Health/Graduate School of Health
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Health/Graduate School of Health/GSH.Speech Pathology
utslib.copyright.status	open_access	*
dc.date.updated	2022-11-30T02:52:11Z
pubs.issue	7
pubs.publication-status	Published online
pubs.volume	5
utslib.citation.issue	7

Abstract:

OBJECTIVES: To develop and validate a national set of best practice statements for use in post-stroke aphasia rehabilitation. DESIGN: Literature review and statement validation using the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method (RAM). PARTICIPANTS: A national Community of Practice of over 250 speech pathologists, researchers, consumers and policymakers developed a framework consisting of eight areas of care in aphasia rehabilitation. This framework provided the structure for the development of a care pathway containing aphasia rehabilitation best practice statements. Nine speech pathologists with expertise in aphasia rehabilitation participated in two rounds of RAND/UCLA appropriateness ratings of the statements. Panellists consisted of researchers, service managers, clinicians and policymakers. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Statements that achieved a high level of agreement and an overall median score of 7-9 on a nine-point scale were rated as 'appropriate'. RESULTS: 74 best practice statements were extracted from the literature and rated across eight areas of care (eg, receiving the right referrals, providing intervention). At the end of Round 1, 71 of the 74 statements were rated as appropriate, no statements were rated as inappropriate, and three statements were rated as uncertain. All 74 statements were then rated again in the face-to-face second round. 16 statements were added through splitting existing items or adding new statements. Seven statements were deleted leaving 83 statements. Agreement was reached for 82 of the final 83 statements. CONCLUSIONS: This national set of 82 best practice statements across eight care areas for the rehabilitation of people with aphasia is the first to be validated by an expert panel. These statements form a crucial component of the Australian Aphasia Rehabilitation Pathway (AARP) (http://www.aphasiapathway.com.au) and provide the basis for more consistent implementation of evidence-based practice in stroke rehabilitation.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/163879