Physical and occupational therapists' learning needs and preferences for education on functional electrical stimulation: A qualitative descriptive study

Kristin E. Musselman,Madi Mayhew,Harneet Somal,Natasha L. Benn,Nancy M. Salbach,Sharon Switzer‐McIntyre

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/aor.14756

2024-04-16

Artificial Organs

Abstract:This study explored the perspectives of 23 physical and occupational therapists on the utility of functional electrical stimulation (FES) e‐learning resources, including whether the resources met their learning needs and preferences. The findings will enable tailoring of knowledge to create effective self‐directed e‐learning resources on FES. Background Functional electrical stimulation (FES) is an evidence‐based intervention that is rarely used by Canadian physical therapists (PTs) and occupational therapists (OTs). A common barrier to FES implementation is a lack of knowledge and training. FES learning resources that meet therapists' learning needs and preferences may address this barrier. Objective To explore OTs' and PTs' perspectives on the utility of FES e‐learning resources, including whether the resources met their learning needs and preferences. Methods Through this qualitative descriptive study, feedback on FES e‐learning resources was solicited from 5 PTs and 18 OTs who work clinically, but do not use FES. Participants reviewed ≥3 prerecorded lectures on FES topics and then completed a semi‐structured interview. Participants were asked about the lectures' content, delivery, ease of use and comprehensibility, and were asked to suggest modifications to facilitate self‐directed learning about FES. Interviews were analyzed using conventional content analysis. Results Three themes were identified. (1) Feedback on FES e‐learning: the content and delivery of the prerecorded lectures facilitated participants' learning, although opportunities to improve content and delivery were identified. (2) Factors influencing FES learning needs and preferences: Participants identified internal (i.e., baseline knowledge, learning style) and external (i.e., learning with colleagues, practice setting) factors that affected learning. Themes 1 and 2 impacted (3) the effects of FES e‐learning: Participants described the outcomes of their FES e‐learning, including increases in FES knowledge, confidence, and use in clinical practice. Conclusion Therapists' perceived the FES e‐learning resources to be useful and to address their learning needs and preferences.

engineering, biomedical,transplantation