How Community-Based Teams Use the Stroke Recovery in Motion Implementation Planner: Longitudinal Qualitative Field Test Study

Jessica Reszel^{1

2}, Joan van den Hoek¹, Tram Nguyen^{1

3}, Gayatri Aravind⁴, Mark T Bayley^{5

6}, Marie-Louise Bird^{7

8}, Kate Edwards⁷, Janice J Eng⁸, Jennifer L Moore^{9

10}, Michelle L A Nelson^{4

11

12}, Michelle Ploughman¹³, Julie Richardson¹⁴, Nancy M Salbach^{6

15}, Ada Tang¹⁴, Ian D Graham^{1

2

3}

Affiliations

¹ Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
² School of Nursing, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
³ School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
⁴ March of Dimes Canada, Toronto, ON, Canada.
⁵ Division of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
⁶ The KITE Research Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.
⁷ College of Health and Medicine, University of Tasmania, Tasmania, Australia.
⁸ Department of Physical Therapy, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, ON, Canada.
⁹ South Eastern Norway Regional Knowledge Translation Center, Sunnaas Rehabilitation Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
¹⁰ Institute for Knowledge Translation, Carmel, IN, United States.
¹¹ Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Sinai Health, Toronto, ON, Canada.
¹² Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
¹³ Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St John's, NL, Canada.
¹⁴ School of Rehabilitation Science, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
¹⁵ Department of Physical Therapy, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.

PMID: 35904855
PMCID: PMC9377454
DOI: 10.2196/37243

How Community-Based Teams Use the Stroke Recovery in Motion Implementation Planner: Longitudinal Qualitative Field Test Study

Jessica Reszel et al. JMIR Form Res. 2022.

. 2022 Jul 29;6(7):e37243.

doi: 10.2196/37243.

Authors

Affiliations

¹ Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
² School of Nursing, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
³ School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
⁴ March of Dimes Canada, Toronto, ON, Canada.
⁵ Division of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
⁶ The KITE Research Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.
⁷ College of Health and Medicine, University of Tasmania, Tasmania, Australia.
⁸ Department of Physical Therapy, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, ON, Canada.
⁹ South Eastern Norway Regional Knowledge Translation Center, Sunnaas Rehabilitation Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
¹⁰ Institute for Knowledge Translation, Carmel, IN, United States.
¹¹ Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Sinai Health, Toronto, ON, Canada.
¹² Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
¹³ Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St John's, NL, Canada.
¹⁴ School of Rehabilitation Science, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
¹⁵ Department of Physical Therapy, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.

PMID: 35904855
PMCID: PMC9377454
DOI: 10.2196/37243

Abstract

Background: The Stroke Recovery in Motion Implementation Planner guides teams through the process of planning for the implementation of community-based exercise programs for people with stroke, in alignment with implementation science frameworks.

Objective: The purpose of this study was to conduct a field test with end users to describe how teams used the Planner in real-world conditions; describe the effects of Planner use on participants' implementation-planning knowledge, attitudes, and activities; and identify factors influencing the use of the Planner.

Methods: This field test study used a longitudinal qualitative design. We recruited teams across Canada who intended to implement a community-based exercise program for people with stroke in the next 6 to 12 months and were willing to use the Planner to guide their work. We completed semistructured interviews at the time of enrollment, monitoring calls every 1 to 2 months, and at the end of the study to learn about implementation-planning work completed and Planner use. The interviews were analyzed using conventional content analysis. Completed Planner steps were plotted onto a timeline for comparison across teams.

Results: We enrolled 12 participants (program managers and coordinators, rehabilitation professionals, and fitness professionals) from 5 planning teams. The teams were enrolled in the study between 4 and 14 months, and we conducted 25 interviews. We observed that the teams worked through the planning process in diverse and nonlinear ways, adapted to their context. All teams provided examples of how using the Planner changed their implementation-planning knowledge (eg, knowing the steps), attitudes (eg, valuing community engagement), and activities (eg, hosting stakeholder meetings). We identified team, organizational, and broader contextual factors that hindered and facilitated uptake of the Planner. Participants shared valuable tips from the field to help future teams optimize use of the Planner.

Conclusions: The Stroke Recovery in Motion Implementation Planner is an adaptable resource that may be used in diverse settings to plan community-based exercise programs for people with stroke. These findings may be informative to others who are developing resources to build the capacity of those working in community-based settings to implement new programs and practices. Future work is needed to monitor the use and understand the effect of using the Planner on exercise program implementation and sustainability.

Keywords: capacity building; community-based exercise programs; implementation planning; implementation science; knowledge mobilization; knowledge translation; rehabilitation; stroke.

©Jessica Reszel, Joan van den Hoek, Tram Nguyen, Gayatri Aravind, Mark T Bayley, Marie-Louise Bird, Kate Edwards, Janice J Eng, Jennifer L Moore, Michelle L A Nelson, Michelle Ploughman, Julie Richardson, Nancy M Salbach, Ada Tang, Ian D Graham. Originally published in JMIR Formative Research (https://formative.jmir.org), 29.07.2022.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

Figures

**Figure 1**
Summary of Planner phases and steps completed by field test teams during the study period.

See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

1. Public Health Agency of Canada. Ottawa, ON: Public Health Agency of Canada; 2017. [2022-02-08]. Stroke in Canada: Highlights from the Canadian Chronic Disease Surveillance System. https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/services/publications/diseases-co... .
1. Together In Movement and Exercise (TIME™) University Health Network. 2022. [2022-02-08]. https://www.uhn.ca/TorontoRehab/Clinics/TIME .
1. Fit for Function Community Stroke Wellness Program. Mobility Research. 2021. [2022-02-08]. http://mobilityresearch.ca/fit-for-function-2/
1. FAME - Fitness and Mobility Exercise Program. 2021. [2022-02-08]. http://fameexercise.com/
1. Saunders DH, Sanderson M, Hayes S, Johnson L, Kramer S, Carter DD, Jarvis H, Brazzelli M, Mead GE. Physical fitness training for stroke patients. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Mar 20;3(3):CD003316. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003316.pub7. http://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/32196635 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources

Full Text Sources

Save citation to file

Email citation

Add to Collections

Add to My Bibliography

Your saved search

Create a file for external citation management software

Your RSS Feed

How Community-Based Teams Use the Stroke Recovery in Motion Implementation Planner: Longitudinal Qualitative Field Test Study

Affiliations

How Community-Based Teams Use the Stroke Recovery in Motion Implementation Planner: Longitudinal Qualitative Field Test Study

Authors

Affiliations

Abstract

Conflict of interest statement

Figures

References

LinkOut - more resources

Full Text Sources