Apps, J.

Hatzidimitriadou, E.

Smith, R.

English

Canterbury Research and Theses Environment

Research SpaceJournal articleUptake of, attitudes to and experiences of robotic assistive technology in health professionals, parents and carers of children and young adults with neurodisabilities: a protocol for a systematic reviewSmith, R., Apps, J. and Hatzidimitriadou, E.Raymond Smith, Joanna Apps, Eleni Hatzidimitriadou. Uptake of, attitudes to and experiences of robotic assistive technology in health professionals, parents and carers of children and young adults with neurodisabilities: a protocol for a systematic review. PROSPERO 2021 CRD42021243775 Available from: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021243775PROSPEROInternational prospective register of systematic reviews CitationRaymond Smith, Joanna Apps, Eleni Hatzidimitriadou. Uptake of, attitudes to and experiences of roboticassistive technology in health professionals, parents and carers of children and young adults withneurodisabilities: a protocol for a systematic review. PROSPERO 2021 CRD42021243775 Available from: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021243775 Review question1. How is robotic assistive technology perceived to be improving the physical health of children and youngadults with cerebral palsy and other neurological conditions. 2. How does robotic assistive technology impact on the quality of life for children and young adults? 3. What are the barriers and facilitators to the uptake of assistive robotic technology for health professionals,parents and carers of children and young adults?  SearchesThe seven electronic databases to be searched are: MEDLINE; PsycINFO; Social Policy and Practice (SPP);Social Science Citation Index (SSCI); the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature(CINAHL); SPORTDiscus; and Maternity and Infant Care (MIDIRIS). Grey literature sources will be searchedfor any addition articles. We will hand search three journals in an attempt to identify relevant publicationsmissed during the electronic researches. These will be OpenGrey, Social Care Online and OpenAIRE.Reference list searching of relevant literature reviews found during the electronic searches and the finalincluded articles will be conducted. Experts in the field of research will also be contacted to identify otherpotentially relevant articles missed from the electronic searches.Only studies published in English will be eligible for inclusion and there will be no date restrictions.  Search strategyhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPEROFILES/243775_STRATEGY_20210319.pdf Types of study to be includedQuantitative, qualitative and mixed methods research. Condition or domain being studiedAssistive technologies for children and young adults with neurodisabilities. Participants/populationInclusion: Children and young adults (up to 25 years old) with cerebral palsy and other neurologicalconditions.Exclusion: Adults aged 26 years old and above. Children and adults with learning disabilities.  Intervention(s), exposure(s)Novel robotic assistive technologies are being developed to assist children and young adults with cerebralpalsy and other neurological conditions. However, the experiences and attitudes of health professionals,carers and those utilising these new technologies is unclear. Further, the available literature into theseexperiences remains poorly synthesised and understood. Therefore, this systematic review will bringtogether these experiences to enable a clear understanding of the perceived impact on the physical healthand quality of life of children and young adults utilising these new technologies, and explore the barriers and                               Page: 1 / 4PROSPEROInternational prospective register of systematic reviewsfacilitators to assistive technology uptake. Comparator(s)/controlNot applicable Main outcome(s)The primary outcome of this systematic review is to understand the attitudes and experiences of roboticassistive technology in health professionals, parents and carers of children and young adults withneurodisabilities. Additional outcome(s)Additional outcomes are: 1: To understand and explore how robotic assistive technology is perceived to be improving the physicalhealth of children and young adults with cerebral palsy and other neurological conditions.2: To explore how robotic assistive technology impact on the quality of life for children and young adults.3: To establish the barriers and facilitators to the uptake of assistive robotic technology for healthprofessionals, parents and carers of children and young adults. Data extraction (selection and coding)1. Duplicate citationsThe results of the literature searches will be transferred into Excel where article duplicates will be removed.Multiple publications from the same study population identified during full-text review will be assessed fordata duplication and excluded if appropriate.2. Title and abstract screeningA minimum of two reviewers will independently screen all identified titles and abstracts. Any discrepancieswill be resolved by discussion or the intervention of a third reviewer. Copies of articles that appear to meetthe inclusion criteria based on the title and abstract screening will be obtained for full-text review. Articleswhere it cannot be determined from the title and abstract whether it is relevant will also be obtained in full-text to determine eligibility. 3. Full text screening and selection for inclusionFull text articles of relevant titles/abstracts will be independently scrutinised by at least two members of thereview team. Reasons for exclusion will be recorded. Where there is uncertainty about inclusion, consensuswill be achieved by discussion or the involvement of a third reviewer. A PRISMA flow diagram will be used toreport the number of records identified, full-texts retrieved and included, excluded and the reasons for full-text exclusions. At this stage of the screening process, one member of the review team will scan thereference lists of the included studies and appropriate reviews for relevant references that were not identifiedfrom the database searches.4. Data to be extractedData extraction for quantitative studies will include author details, year of publication and publicationtype, participant demographics, sample size, results, key findings related to the experiences of assistivetechnologies and the authors' conclusions. Data extracted for qualitative studies will be the same for those                               Page: 2 / 4PROSPEROInternational prospective register of systematic reviewsincluded for quantitative studies but will also include the main themes identified by the study authors. Risk of bias (quality) assessmentThe quality of included studies will be assessed independently by at least two members of the review teamusing the QualSyst review tool. This tool was selected because it permits scoring for both qualitative andquantitative studies. Any differences in ratings will be identified and consensus achieved through discussionamongst the team members. Although no studies will be excluded based on quality scores, qualityassessment will allow for interrogation of the methodological quality of included studies. Strategy for data synthesisData will be synthesised using a narrative approach. Given the broad research questions and varied studytypes expected, narrative synthesis is an appropriate choice. The review is not investigating the effect ofinterventions and therefore meta-analysis of quantitative studies is unlikely to be suitable. Data will beentered into standardised tables which will include the main findings from each included study. For qualitative studies, review authors will independently read, identify and record themes related theexperiences and attitudes of those using and providing assistive robotic technologies. Review authors willalso document quantitative data relevant to the research questions. Relationships in the data and betweengroups of studies will then be explored pertaining to the research questions, for example, whether somehealth professionals experience additional barriers to the uptake of assistive technology in children andyoung adults with cerebral palsy and other neurological conditions than others (e.g. physiotherapists versusoccupational therapists). Analysis of subgroups or subsetsNot applicable. Contact details for further informationRaymond SmithRaymond.Smith@canterbury.ac.uk Organisational affiliation of the reviewCanterbury Christ Church University Review team members and their organisational affiliationsDr Raymond Smith. Canterbury Christ Church UniversityMs Joanna Apps. Canterbury Christ Church UniversityProfessor Eleni Hatzidimitriadou. Canterbury Christ Church University Type and method of reviewNarrative synthesis, Systematic review Anticipated or actual start date22 February 2021 Anticipated completion date30 July 2021 Funding sources/sponsorsInterreg 2Seas Programme Conflicts of interest Language                               Page: 3 / 4PROSPEROInternational prospective register of systematic reviewsEnglish CountryEngland Stage of reviewReview Ongoing Subject index terms statusSubject indexing assigned by CRD Subject index termsAttitude; Caregivers; Child; Disabled Persons; Health Personnel; Humans; Parents; Robotic SurgicalProcedures; Self-Help Devices; Young Adult Date of registration in PROSPERO16 April 2021 Date of first submission14 April 2021 Stage of review at time of this submission Stage Started CompletedPreliminary searches Yes NoPiloting of the study selection process No NoFormal screening of search results against eligibility criteria No NoData extraction No NoRisk of bias (quality) assessment No NoData analysis No No Revision noteFormatting errors corrected for the PDF version.The record owner confirms that the information they have supplied for this submission is accurate andcomplete and they understand that deliberate provision of inaccurate information or omission of data may beconstrued as scientific misconduct.The record owner confirms that they will update the status of the review when it is completed and will addpublication details in due course. Versions16 April 202119 April 202130 April 2021Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)                               Page: 4 / 4

Uptake of, attitudes to and experiences of robotic assistive technology in health professionals, parents and carers of children and young adults with neurodisabilities: a protocol for a systematic review

https://repository.canterbury.ac.uk/download/fed39f657de701618936f697525daea97100ca1a723fe09f0eacd3a9581e9bb6/104522/CRD42021243775.pdf

Uptake of, attitudes to and experiences of robotic assistive technology in health professionals, parents and carers of children and young adults with neurodisabilities: a protocol for a systematic review

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Canterbury Research and Theses Environment