1,466
Views
27
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Articles

Increasing the intensity and comprehensiveness of aphasia services: identification of key factors influencing implementation across six countries

, ORCID Icon, , , ORCID Icon, , , ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon & ORCID Icon show all
Pages 865-887 | Received 21 Dec 2018, Accepted 29 Mar 2019, Published online: 12 Apr 2019
 

ABSTRACT

Background: Aphasia services are currently faced by increasing evidence for therapy of greater intensity and comprehensiveness. Intensive Comprehensive Aphasia Programs (ICAPs) combine these elements in an evidence-based, time-limited group program. The incorporation of new service delivery models in routine clinical practice is, however, likely to pose challenges for both the service provider and administering clinicians. This program of research aims to identify these challenges from the perspective of aphasia clinicians from six countries and will seek to trial potential solutions. Continual advancements in global communication technologies suggest that solutions will be easily shared and accessed across multiple countries.

Aims: To identify the perceived and experienced barriers and facilitators to the implementation of 1) intensive aphasia services, 2) comprehensive aphasia services, and 3) ICAPs, from aphasia clinicians across six countries.

Methods and procedures: A qualitative enquiry approach included data from six focus groups (n = 34 participants) in Australia, New Zealand, Canada, United States of America (USA), United Kingdom (UK), and Ireland. A thematic analysis of focus group data was informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF).

Outcomes and results: Five prominent theoretical domains from the TDF influenced the implementation of all three aphasia service types across participating countries: environmental context and resources, beliefs about consequences, social/professional role and identity, skills, and knowledge. Four overarching themes assisted the identification and explanation of the key barriers and facilitators: 1. Collaboration, joint initiatives and partnerships, 2. Advocacy, the promotion of aphasia services and evidence-based practice, 3. Innovation, the ability to problem solve challenges, and 4. Culture, the influence of underlying values.

Conclusions: The results of this study will inform the development of a theoretically informed intervention to improve health services’ adherence to aphasia best practice recommendations.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Supplementary material

Supplementary data can be accessed here.

Log in via your institution

Log in to Taylor & Francis Online

PDF download + Online access

  • 48 hours access to article PDF & online version
  • Article PDF can be downloaded
  • Article PDF can be printed
USD 53.00 Add to cart

Issue Purchase

  • 30 days online access to complete issue
  • Article PDFs can be downloaded
  • Article PDFs can be printed
USD 386.00 Add to cart

* Local tax will be added as applicable

Related Research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.