Physiotherapy as part of collaborative and person-centered rehabilitation services: the social systems constraining an innovative practice

References

• Aadal L, Pallesen H, Arntzen C, Moe S 2018 Municipal cross-disciplinary rehabilitation following stroke in Denmark and Norway: A qualitative study. Rehabilitation Research and Practice 2018: 972190. 10.1155/2018/1972190
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ackroyd S, Karlsson JC 2014 Critical realism, rearch techniques, and research designs. In: Edwards OJ Vincent S (Eds) Studying Organizations Using Critical Realism: A Practical Guide, pp. 21–45. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199665525.003.0002
   Google Scholar
• Allen D 2015 The Invisible work of nurses: Hospitals, Organisation and healthcare. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Andreassen TA 2019 Complex problems in need of inter-organizational coordination: The importance of connective and collaborative professionalism within an organizational field of rehabilitation. In: Harsløf I, Poulsen I Larsen K (Eds) New Dynamics of Disability and Rehabilitation: Interdisciplinary Perspectives, pp. 225–249. Singapore: Springer Verlag. 10.1007/978-981-13-7346-6_10
   Google Scholar
• Andreassen TA, Fossestøl K 2014 Utfordrende inkluderingspolitikk: Samstyring for omforming av institusjonell logikk i arbeidslivet, helsetjenesten og NAV. [Developing a holistic and user centered employment and welfare service]. Tidsskrift for Samfunnsforskning 55: 174–202. 10.18261/ISSN1504-291X-2014-02-02
   Google Scholar
• Arntzen C, Borg T, Hamran T 2015 Long-term recovery trajectory after stroke: An ongoing negotiation between body, participation and self. Disability and Rehabilitation 37(18): 1626–1634. 10.3109/09638288.2014.972590
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bate P, Robert G 2007 Bringing user experience to healthcare Improvement: The Concepts, Methods and practices of experience-based Design. London: CRC Press.
   Google Scholar
• Belcher BM, Rasmussen KE, Kemshaw MR, Zornes DA 2016 Defining and assessing research quality in a transdisciplinary context. Research Evaluation 25(1): 1–17. 10.1093/reseval/rvv025
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berg AM 2014 Organizing for innovation in the public sector. In: Fuglesang L, Rønning R Enquist B (Eds) Framing Innovation in Public Service Sectors, pp. 130–147. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Bokhour BG, Fix GM, Mueller NM, Barker AM, Lavela SL, Hill JN, Solomon JL, Lukas CV 2018 How can healthcare organizations implement patient-centered care? Examining a large-scale cultural transformation. BMC Health Services Research 18(1): 168. 10.1186/s12913-018-2949-5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braun V, Clark V 2022 Toward good practice in thematic analysis: Avoiding common problems and be(com)ing a knowing researcher. SAGE Publications Inc International Journal of Transgender Health. 24(1): 1–6. 10.1080/26895269.2022.2129597
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Breit E, Andreassen TA 2021 Organizational views on collaboration in welfare services. Tidsskrift for velferdsforskning 24: 7–20. 10.18261/issn.2464-3076-2021-01-02
   Google Scholar
• Cheng L, Leon V, Liang A, Reiher C, Roberts D, Feldthusen C, Mannerkorpi K, Dean E 2016 Patient-centered care in physical therapy: Definition, operationalization, and outcome measures. Physical Therapy Reviews 21(2): 109–123. 10.1080/10833196.2016.1228558
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cott CA, Wiles R, Devitt R 2007 Continuity, transition and participation: Preparing clients for life in the community post-stroke. Disability and Rehabilitation 29(20–21): 1566–1574. 10.1080/09638280701618588
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Creswell JW, Poth CN 2018 Qualitative Inquiry and research Design: Choosing among Five Approaches (4th). Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Design Council UK 2023 Framework for innovation. Design Council. London, England. https://www.designcouncil.org.uk/our-resources/framework-for-innovation/
   Google Scholar
• Egan MY, Laliberté-Rudman D, Rutkowski N, Lanoix M, Meyer M, McEwen S, Collver M, Linkewich E, Montgomery P, Quant S, et al. 2020 The implications of the Canadian stroke Best practice Recommendations for design and allocation of rehabilitation after hospital discharge: A problematization. Disability and Rehabilitation 42(23): 3403–3415. 10.1080/09638288.2019.1592244
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elg M, Gremyr I, Halldorsson Á, Wallo A 2020 Service action research: Review and guide-lines. Journal of Services Marketing 34: 87–99. 10.1108/JSM-11-2018-0350
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eriksson E, Hellström A 2021 Multi‐actor resource integration: A service approach in public management. British Journal of Management 32(2): 456–472. 10.1111/1467-8551.12414
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evetts J 2010 Reconnecting professional occupations with professional organizations: Risk and opportunities. In: Svensson L, and Evetts J (Eds) Sociology of Professions: Continental and Anglo-Saxon traditions, pp. 123–144. Göteborg, Sweden: Daidalos.
   Google Scholar
• Friedland R 1991 Bringing society back in: Symbols, practices, and institutional contradictions. In: Powell WW, DiMaggio PJ (Eds) The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis, pp. 232–263. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fuglesang L, Rønning R 2014 Introduction framing innovation in public service sectors: A contextual approach. In: Fuglesang L, Rønning R Enquist B (Eds) Framing Innovation in Public Service Sectors, pp. 1–17. New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315885612
   Google Scholar
• Gibbons M 1999 Science’s new social contract with society. Nature 402(Suppl 6761): 81–84. 10.1038/35011576
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gibson B 2016 Rehabilitation: A post-critical approach. Boca Raton, USA: CRC Press.
   Google Scholar
• Goodwin N, Stein V, Amelung V 2017 What is integrated care? In: Amelung V, Stein V, Goodwin N, Balicer R, Nolte E Suter E (Eds) Handbook of Integrated Care, pp. 3–24. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing. 10.1007/978-3-319-56103-5_1
   Google Scholar
• Greenhalgh T, Jackson C, Shaw S, Janamian T 2016 Achieving research impact through co‐creation in community‐based health services: Literature review and case study. The Milbank Quarterly 94(2): 392–429. 10.1111/1468-0009.12197
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gustavsen B 1996 Action research, democratic dialogue, and the issue of “critical mass” in change. Qualitative Inquiry 2: 90–103. 10.1177/107780049600200113
   Google Scholar
• Håkansson Eklund J, Holmström IK, Kumlin T, Kaminsky E, Skoglund K, Höglander J, Sundler AJ, Condén E, Summer Merenius M 2019 “Same same or different?” a review of reviews of person-centered and patient-centered care. Patient Education and Counseling 102: 3–11. 10.1016/j.pec.2018.08.029
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hammond R, Stenner R, Palmer S 2022 What matters most: A qualitative study of person-centered physiotherapy practice in community rehabilitation. Physiotherapy Theory and Practice 38(9): 1207–1218. 10.1080/09593985.2020.1825577
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harsløf I, Slomic M, Håvold OK 2019 Establishing individual care plans for rehabilitation patients: Traces of self-targeting in the norwegian universal welfare state. Nordic Journal of Social Research 10: 24–47. 10.7577/njsr.2686
   Google Scholar
• Irgens EL, Henriksen N, Moe S 2020a Communicating information and professional knowledge in acquired brain injury rehabilitation trajectories - a qualitative study of physiotherapy practice. Disability and Rehabilitation 42: 2012–2019. 10.1080/09638288.2018.1544295
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Irgens EL, Henriksen N, Moe S 2020b Variations in physiotherapy practice in neurological rehabilitation trajectories - an explorative interview and observational study. Physiotherapy Theory and Practice 36: 95–107. 10.1080/09593985.2018.1480679
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jensen MB, Johnson B, Lorenz E, Lundvall BA 2007 Forms of knowledge and modes of innovation. Research Policy 36: 680–693. 10.1016/j.respol.2007.01.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jesus TS, Papadimitriou C, Bright FA, Kayes NM, Pinho CS, Cott CA 2022 Person-centered rehabilitation model: Framing the concept and practice of person-centered adult physical rehabilitation based on a scoping review and thematic analysis of the literature. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 103(1): 106–120. 10.1016/j.apmr.2021.05.005
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kayes NM, Papadimitriou C 2023 Reflecting on challenges and opportunities for the practice of person-centred rehabilitation. Clinical Rehabilitation 37(8): 1026–1040. 10.1177/02692155231152970
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee JS, Pries-Heje J, Baskerville R 2011 Theorizing in design science research. In: Jain H, Sinha A Vitharana P (Eds) Service-Oriented Perspectives in Design Science Research: DESRIST, pp. 1–16. Berlin, GermanyBerlin Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. 10.1007/978-3-642-20633-7_1
   Google Scholar
• Levack WM, Dean SG, Siegert RJ, McPherson KM 2011 Navigating patient-centered goal setting in inpatient stroke rehabilitation: How clinicians control the process to meet perceived professional responsibilities. Patient Education and Counseling 85: 206–213. 10.1016/j.pec.2011.01.011
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morgan S, Yoder LH 2012 A concept analysis of person-centered care. Journal of Holistic Nursing 30(1): 6–15. 10.1177/0898010111412189
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Nicholls DA 2017 The end of physiotherapy. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Nicholls DA, Gibson BE 2010 The body and physiotherapy. Physiotherapy Theory and Practice 26(8): 497–509. 10.3109/09593981003710316
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Noordegraaf M 2007 From “pure” to “hybrid” professionalism: Present-day professionalism in ambiguous public domains. Administration and Society 39(6): 761–785. 10.1177/0095399707304434
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Noordegraaf M 2011 Risky business: How professionals and professional fields (must) deal with organizational issues. Organization Studies 32(10): 1349–1371. 10.1177/0170840611416748
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Noordegraaf M 2016 Reconfiguring professional work: Changing forms of professionalism in public services. Administration and Society 48(7): 783–810. 10.1177/0095399713509242
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norwegian Directorate of Health 2008 White Paper no 47 (2008-2009). Samhandlingsreformen. Rett Behandling - På Rett Sted - Til Rett Tid [the coordination Reform. Proper treatment - at the right Place and right time]. Oslo, Norway.
   Google Scholar
• Norwegian Directorate of Health 2020a Evaluering av Opptrappingsplan for Habilitering og Rehabilitering (2017-2019). [Evaluation of the Escalation plan for Habilitation and rehabilitation]. Oslo, Norway. https://helsedirektoratet.no/rapporter
   Google Scholar
• Norwegian Directorate of Health 2020b Nasjonal Veileder: Rehabilitering, Habilitering, Individuell plan og Koordinator. [national guidelines: Rehabilitation, Habilitation, individual care plans, and care manager]. Oslo, Norway. https://www.helsedirektoratet.no/veiledere.
   Google Scholar
• Norwegian Ministry of Health and Care Services 2018 Forskrift om Habilitering og Rehabilitering, Individuell plan og Koordinator [Regulations on Habilitation and rehabilitation, individual care plans and care manager]. Norwegian Ministry of Health and Care. Oslo, Norway. https://lovdata.no/dokument/SF/forskrift/2011-12-16-1256.
   Google Scholar
• Østensjø S, Askheim OP 2019 Forskning med nye aktører – Forskningskvalitet og nytteverdi. [Research with new stakeholders - Research quality and usefulness. In: Askheim O, Lid I Østensjø S (Eds) Samproduksjon i Forskning: Forskning med nye Aktører [Co-Production in Research: Research with New Players, pp. 231–245. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget. 10.18261/9788215031675-2019-14
   Google Scholar
• Paavola S, Lipponen L, Hakkarainen K 2004 Models of innovative knowledge communities and three metaphors of learning. Review of Educational Research 74(4): 557–576. 10.3102/00346543074004557
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plsek PE, Greenhalgh T 2001 Complexity science: The challenge of complexity in health care. British Medical Journal 323(7313): 625–628. 10.1136/bmj.323.7313.625
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ram M, Edwards PK, Jones T, Kiselinhev A, Muchenje L 2014 Pulling the levers of agency: Implementing critical realist action research. In: Edwards OJ Vincent S (Eds) Studying Organizations Using Critical Realism: A Practical Guide, pp. 205–222. Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199665525.003.0011
   Google Scholar
• Shaikh NM, Kersten P, Siegert RJ, Theadom A 2019 Theadom a 2019 developing a comprehensive framework of community integration for people with acquired brain injury: A conceptual analysis. Disability and Rehabilitation 41(14): 1615–1631. 10.1080/09638288.2018.1443163
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sjöberg V, Forsner M 2022 Shifting roles: Physiotherapists’ perception of person-centered care during a pre-implementation phase in the acute hospital setting - a phenomenographic study. Physiotherapy Theory and Practice 38(7): 879–889. 10.1080/09593985.2020.1809042
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Skålén P 2018 Service logic. Lund: Studentlitteratur.
   Google Scholar
• Solvang PK, Fougner M 2016 Professional roles in physiotherapy practice: Educating for self-management, relational matching, and coaching for everyday life. Physiotherapy Theory and Practice 32(8): 591–602. 10.1080/09593985.2016.1228018
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thornton PH, Ocasio W 2008 Institutional logics. In: Greenwood R, Oliver C, Sahlin K Suddaby R (Eds) The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism, pp. 99–128. SAGE Publications Inc. 10.4135/9781849200387.n4
   Google Scholar
• Thornton PH, Ocasio W, Lounsbury M 2012 The institutional logics perspective: A new approach to Culture, Structure and process. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tjora A 2021 Kvalitative Forskningsmetoder i Praksis (4^th ed). [qualitative research Methods]. Oslo: Gyldendal Akademisk.
   Google Scholar
• Torfing J 2019 Collaborative innovation in the public sector: The argument. Public Management Review 21(1): 1–11. 10.1080/14719037.2018.1430248
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• UiT Arctic University of Norway 2023 RehabLos. Tromsø, Norway. https://uit.no/project/rehablos
   Google Scholar
• Vik E 2018 Helseprofesjoners samhandling - en litteraturstudie. [coordination between health care professions - a scoping review]. Tidsskrift for velferdsforskning 21: 119–147. 10.18261/issn.2464-3076-2018-02-03
   Google Scholar
• Vike H 2018 Politics and Bureaucracy in the Norwegian welfare state: An Anthropological approach. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1007/978-3-319-64137-9
   Google Scholar
• Vik E, Hjelseth A 2022 Integration of health services - Eight theses on coordination in a functionally differentiated healthcare system. Tidsskrift for Samfunnsforskning 63: 122–140. 10.18261/tfs.63.2.3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wade D 2015 Rehabilitation - a new approach. Part two: The underlying theories. Clinical Rehabilitation 29: 1145–1154. 10.1177/0269215515601175
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Windrum P, Schartinger D, Rubalcaba L, Gallouj F, Toivonen M 2016 The co-creation of multi-agent social innovations: A bridge between service and social innovation research. European Journal of Innovation Management 19(2): 150–166. 10.1108/EJIM-05-2015-0033
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• World Health Organization 2017 Rehabilitation in health systems. http://www.who.int/en/.
   Google Scholar
• World Health Organization 2020 Rehabilitation Competency framework.
   Google Scholar
• World Medical Association 2013 World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical Principles for Medical research Involving Human Subjects. JAMA 310(20): 2191–2194. 10.1001/jama.2013.281053
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zonneveld N, Glimmerveen L, Minkman M 2021 Values in integrated care. In: Amelund V, Stein V, Suter E, Goodwin N, Nolte E Balicer R (Eds) Handbook Integrated Care (2nd), pp. 53–66. 10.1007/978-3-030-69262-9_4
   Google Scholar