Training Needs and Development of Online AT Training for Healthcare Professionals in UK and France

Background: Assistive Technology (AT) solutions for people with disabilities has become part of mainstream care provision. Despite advantages of AT on offer, abandonment and non-compliance are challenges for healthcare professionals (HCPs), introducing this technology to clients. Studies of abandonment reveal that 1/3 of all devices provided to service users end up stored unused. Key need is training to make informed decisions about AT tailored to individual needs and circumstances. In an online survey undertaken by the ADAPT project, HPCs identified AT training needs and barriers. Currently, a programme is being developed aimed at introducing AT concepts and enhancing practices to a wide range of HCPs. Method: Survey questions explored gaps, availability, qualifications and barriers to AT training in England and France. A series of consultation meetings with ADAPT partners took place. An advisory group consisting of longstanding AT users and their formal/informal carers and HCPs (occupational therapist, speech and language therapist, psychologist and biomedical engineer) contributed to the discussions on survey findings, development and evaluation of AT training for HCPs, key content areas and means of delivery. Key results: HCPs had no AT specific qualifications (UK 94.6%; FR 81.3%) nor in-service AT training (UK 65.1%; FR 66.4%). They either did not know of AT courses (UK 63.3%) or knew that none existed (FR 72.5%). Barriers to AT training were mainly local training (UK 62.7%, FR 50%) and funding (UK 62.7%, FR 55.7%). Some training priorities were clearer for French HCPs – overall knowledge of AT devices (82.1%, UK 45.8%), customization of AT (65.3%, UK 30.1%), assessing patient holistically (53.4%, UK 25.3%), educating patient/carers (56.5%, UK 28.3%) (p < 0.001). Variances may be due to differing country-specific HCP education approach. A third of both groups highlighted also abandonment, client follow-up, powered wheelchair training and prescribing AT. To bridge gaps in knowledge and identified training needs of HCPs, the online interactive training programme starts by introducing foundations of AT, including definitions, types/uses of AT, legislation/policies and AT in practice. More specialist units build and expand on specific areas, e.g. AT for mobility, communication, assessment and evidence-based practice. The biopsychosocial model of Health and World Health Organisation’s (WHO) International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) framework underpin development of content. ICF shifts focus from disability to health and functioning, in line with a social model of rehabilitation. E-learning comprises existing videos, AT textbook material and bespoke animated presentations. Selfassessment and evaluation of training are embedded and learners receive certificate of completion. Training was piloted to a group of HCPs trainees and postregistration HCPs who commented on relevance of AT content, clarity, accessibility of presentation, and usefulness. Users found training very useful, especially legislation/policies and AT literature. Conclusion: Overall, survey results suggest that both UK and French HCPs’ training on AT solutions is limited and highly variable. There is need for crosschannel AT professional competencies, availability of work-based training and funding support. Development of online, interactive training aims to increase professional confidence and competence in this area as well as the evidence base for AT

A Survey of Assistive Technology (AT) Knowledge and Experiences of Healthcare Professionals in the UK and France: Challenges and Opportunities for Workforce Development

Background: Assistive Technologies (AT) in healthcare can increase independence and quality of life for users. Concurrently, new AT devices offer opportunities for individualised care solutions. Nonetheless, AT remains under-utilised and is poorly integrated in practice by healthcare professionals (HCPs). Although occupational therapists (OTs), physiotherapists and speech and language therapists (SLTs) consider that AT solutions can offer problem-solving approaches to personalised care, they have a lesser understanding of application of AT in their practice. In this paper, we report findings of a survey on AT knowledge and experiences of HCPs in UK and France. Training needs also explored in the survey are presented in a separate paper on development of online training for the ADAPT project. Method: A survey of 37 closed/open questions was developed in English and French by a team of healthcare researchers. Content was informed by published surveys and studies. Email invitations were circulated to contacts in Health Trusts in UK and France ADAPT regions and the survey was hosted on an online platform. Knowledge questions addressed AT understanding and views of impact on user’s lives. Experience questions focussed on current practices, prescription, follow-up, abandonment and practice standards. 429 HCPs completed the survey (UK = 167; FR = 262) between June and November 2018. Key results: Participants were mainly female (UK 89.2%; FR 82.8%) and qualified 10+ years (UK 66.5%; FR 62.2%). A key group in both countries were OTs (UK 34.1%; FR 46.6%), with more physiotherapists and SLTs in UK (16.8%, 16.8%; vs. FR 6.5%, 2.3%), and more nurses in France (22.1% Vs. UK 10.8%). More HCPs were qualified to degree level in France (75.2%; UK 48.5%, p < 0.001). In terms of knowledge, all HCPs agreed that AT helps people complete otherwise difficult or impossible tasks (UK 86.2%; FR 94.3%) and that successful AT adoption always depends on support from carers, family and professionals (UK 52.7%; FR 66.2%). There were some notable differences between countries that require further exploration. For example, more French HCPs thought that AT is provided by trial and error (84.7%, UK 45.5%, p < 0.001), while more UK HCPs believed that AT promotes autonomous living (93.4%; FR 42.8%, p < 0.001). Also, more French HCPs considered that AT refers exclusively to technologically advanced electronic devices (71.8%, UK 28.8%, p <0.001). In both countries, top AT prescribers were OTs, physiotherapists and SLTs. Respondents had little/no knowledge in comparing/choosing AT (UK 86.8%; FR 76.7%) and stated they would benefit from interdisciplinary clinical standards (UK 80.8%; FR 77.1%). A third of HCPs did not know if AT users had access to adequate resources/support (UK 34.1%; FR 27.5%) and rated themselves as capable to monitor continued effective use of AT (UK 38.9%; FR 34.8%). Conclusion: Knowledge and application of AT was varied between the two countries due to differences in health care provision and support mechanisms. Survey findings suggest that HCPs recognised the value of AT for users’ improved care, but had low confidence in their ability to choose appropriate AT solutions and monitor continued use, and would welcome AT interdisciplinary clinical standards

A new approach to evaluate toxicity of gases on mobile cells in culture

International audienc