Scoping the technology landscape of Day Hospital Brain Injury Rehabilitation Services

About the Project

The increased availability and accessibility of technology has the potential to expand rehabilitation opportunities and contribute to better functional outcomes for people with acquired brain injury (ABI). However, while research indicates that people with ABI are keen to learn about technology options in rehabilitation, the uptake of technology during rehabilitation and sustained use beyond programs can be poor. This body of work aims to better understand the current practices and role of technology in brain injury rehabilitation and factors influencing the uptake and sustained use of technology.

Aims and objectives

1. Identify individuals’ use and familiarity with technology prior to their ABI and examine changes in the nature and frequency of individuals’ technology use and perceived importance of technology since their ABI.
2. Explore similarities and differences in types, reasons, and importance of technology use between individuals who have experienced an ABI and those without neurological injuries in the general population.
3. Scope the current use of different types of technology during allied health consultations within an outpatient rehabilitation service.
4. Identify factors influencing the uptake and sustained use of technology over time following outpatient rehabilitation and examine associations between technology use and self-awareness, mood, quality of life and community reintegration.

Expected outcomes

This scoping study progresses understanding of the role of technology following ABI and in specialised outpatient rehabilitation services, as well as factors influencing the uptake and sustained use of technology after rehabilitation.

Expected impact

This project will increase understanding of how technology can be used to support people following ABI to increase day-to-day functioning, independence, self-confidence, and quality of life. It also expected to identify areas of need and opportunity where a technology consultation service, specialised training, and/or educational resources could have a positive impact on the delivery of brain injury outpatient rehabilitation services.

Progress and preliminary results

Electronic assistive technology to support memory function after traumatic brain injury
A systematic review of existing literature was undertaken to look at how effective electronic assistive technology is for helping with memory issues after a traumatic brain injury (TBI). This review not only showed that these technologies can indeed aid memory, but it also introduced a new theoretical model. This model explores the various factors that affect how well people with TBI adopt and benefit from this technology. The findings from this review were published in the Journal of Neurotrauma

 Find the details of this publication here.

Technology use in the Princess Alexandra Hospital Brain Injury Rehabilitation Day Hospital
A longitudinal mixed-methods study is underway at the Princess Alexandra Hospital Brain Injury Rehabilitation Day Hospital. Patient- and clinician-completed surveys and interviews are being used to explore the type, purpose, frequency and importance of technology use, as well as barriers and enablers across four time points: admission (T1), during each therapy session (T2), at discharge (T3) and at three to six months post-discharge (T4).

Recruitment and data collection are ongoing, though data have been analysed for 41 people with ABI who are patients of the service. Preliminary data show relatively high use of technology during outpatient brain injury rehabilitation. On average, technology was talked about or used in about 53% of sessions, and almost all patients discussed technology at least once. Occupational Therapists and Speech Pathologists are the main ones to discuss or use technology, focusing on tools like electronic calendars, alarms, reminders, and apps for note-taking to help with memory and planning.

Clinicians noted that psychological, cognitive, or communication challenges were significant barriers to using technology after a brain injury. On the flip side, patients who were familiar with technology before their injury and motivated to meet their rehabilitation goals and had support to use technology at home were more likely to use it successfully.

Further data collection and analysis will broaden the understanding of the role of technology in brain injury rehabilitation and provide insight into ways to support technology use following ABI.

Presentations

Ownsworth, T., Mitchell, J., Griffin, J., Bell, R., Gibson, E., & Shirota, C. (2023, March 23). Electronic assistive technology to support memory function after brain injury [Presentation]. Hopkins Hour, Brisbane, Australia.

Ownsworth, T., Mitchell, J., Griffin, J., Bell, R., Gibson, E., & Shirota, C. (2023, May 04-06). Electronic assistive technology to support memory function after traumatic brain injury: A systematic review of efficacy and user perspectives [Conference presentation]. ASSBI Annual Brain Impairment Conference, Darwin, Australia.

Ownsworth, T., Mitchell, J., Griffin, J., Bell, R., Gibson, E., & Shirota, C. (2023, June 07-09). Electronic assistive technology to support memory function after traumatic brain injury: A systematic review of efficacy and user perspectives [Conference presentation]. NR-SIG-WFNR 20th Conference, Glasgow, Scotland.

Seeney, R., Mitchell, J., Shirota, C., Bell, R., Gibson, E., Ownsworth, T., Griffin, J. (2024, May 02-04). Preliminary scoping of technology use in outpatient brain injury rehabilitation services [Poster presentation]. ASSBI Annual Brain Impairment Conference, Sydney, Australia.

Publications

Ownsworth, T., Mitchell, J., Griffin, J., Bell, R., Gibson, E. C., & Shirota, C. (2023). Electronic Assistive Technology to Support Memory Function After Traumatic Brain Injury: A Systematic Review of Efficacy and User Perspectives. Journal of Neurotrauma. https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2022.0434

Project Team

Prof Tamara Ownsworth (THC), Dr Jessie Mitchell (THC), Dr Camila Shirota (THC), Janelle Griffin (MSH, BIRU), Dr Ryan Bell (MSH, BIRU), Dr Emily Gibson (MSH, BIRU), Mary Kayssar (MSH, BIRU), Marie Ducroz (MSH, BIRU), Grace Scott (MSH, BIRU), Jasmin Cowles (MSH, BIRU), Waydy Mitchell (THC)*, Rebecca Seeney (MSH, BIRU)

* citizen/lived experience researchers

Funding 

This research was funded by the Metro South Health Research Support Scheme as part of a Co-Funded Collaboration Grant Program Grant with Griffith University. We also acknowledge the funding and support from the Motor Accident Insurance Commission.