ABSTRACT
Purpose Reactive balance training (RBT) aims to improve reactive balance control. However, because RBT involves clients losing balance, clinicians may view that it is unsafe or not feasible for some clients. We aimed to explore how clinicians are specifically implementing RBT to treat balance and mobility issues.
Materials and methods Physiotherapists and kinesiologists across Canada who reported that they include RBT in their practices were invited to complete telephone interviews about their experience with RBT. Interviews were transcribed verbatim, and analysed using a deductive thematic analysis.
Results Ten participants completed telephone interviews, which lasted between 30-60 minutes. Participants were primarily working in a hospital setting (inpatient rehabilitation (n=3); outpatient rehabilitation (n=2), and were treating those with neurological disorders (n=5). Four main themes were identified: 1) there is variability in RBT approaches; 2) knowledge can be a barrier and facilitator to RBT; 3) reactive balance control is viewed as an advanced skill; and 4) RBT experience builds confidence.
Conclusions Our findings suggest a need for resources to make clinical implementation of RBT more feasible.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study is supported by the Heart and Stroke Foundation Canadian Partnership for Stroke Recovery. AM held a New Investigator Award from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (MSH-141983). NMS holds a Heart & Stroke Foundation Mid-Career Investigator award. We also acknowledge the support of the Toronto Rehabilitation Institute; equipment and space have been funded with grants from the Canada Foundation for Innovation, Ontario Innovation Trust, and the Ministry of Research and Innovation. These funding sources had no role in the design of this study and will not have any role during its execution, analysis, interpretation of the data, or decision to submit results.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This study was approved by the research ethics board of the University Health Network.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Not applicable.
