Combining functional electrical stimulation with visual feedback balance training: a qualitative study of end-user
Elina Nezon1,2, Tanha Patel3, Kayla Benson2
1Rehabilitation Sciences Institute, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Background:
Individuals with stroke or spinal cord injury (SCI) often have poor balance control, leading to falls and activity limitations. One intervention that targets balance control-functional electrical stimulation with visual feedback balance training (FES+VFBT)-may improve balance control but needs modifications for clinical use.
Objective:
To use a participatory design approach to identify potential challenges and solutions for the clinical implementation of FES+VFBT as a balance intervention.
Design/Methods:
A descriptive qualitative study involving four semi-structured focus group meetings was conducted to explore the perspectives of individuals with stroke and SCI, physical therapists and a hospital administrator on the feasibility and challenges of implementing FES+VFBT into clinical settings. The interviews were transcribed and analysed using deductive and inductive content analyses. The deductive analysis was based on the social ecological model (SEM) levels, while the inductive approach was used to identify categories and codes.
Setting:
Virtual.
Participants:
Two individuals with chronic SCI and one individual with chronic stroke who were able to stand but reported deficits in their balance control. Two physical therapists who had experience with FES and the rehabilitation of individuals with SCI or stroke. One hospital administrator who worked within a neurological rehabilitation setting.
Results:
Themes were organised according to the SEM's four levels: intrapersonal, interpersonal, organisational/training environment and society/policy. Identified categories included potential challenges at the intrapersonal level (ie, lack of knowledge, safety and tolerance of user) and organisational/training environment level (ie, technical challenges, cost, physical space and time). The categories also included possible solutions at all SEM levels, such as intrapersonal (ie, reading and education), interpersonal (ie, practising together), organisational/training environment (ie, technology characteristics and creating resources) and society/policy (ie, purchasing options, guidelines and foundation grants).
Conclusions:
End-users identified anticipated challenges and solutions to using the FES+VFBT system clinically. The results will inform the design and clinical implementation of a revised version of the system and other FES devices.
