Article type
Year
Abstract
Background: The CÉRIU, a Consortium of six rehabilitation centers, has been funded by the Institut national d'excellence en santé et en services sociaux, Quebec, Canada, with two objectives: firstly, to develop a Health Technology Assessment (HTA) team specialised in physical rehabilitation; and secondly, to conduct a HTA project comparing group and individual interventions in adults with motor, sensory or language disabilities during physical rehabilitation.
In the field of physical rehabilitation, HTA, which traditionally rely on systemic reviews, are often more difficult to conduct since there are few randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Moreover there is a prevalence of qualitative literature resulting from the psychosocial aspects inherent to the field. In order to complete the HTA on comparing group and individual interventions, the methodology in gathering and evaluating evidence was adapted to address this reality.
Objectives: To develop a methodology to gather, filter and evaluate the evidence for decision-making in physical rehabilitation efficiently.
Methods: Unique combinations of filters and databases and a rubric for mixed-methods analysis were used by the HTA team. The process necessitated a close collaboration between clinicians, information specialists and researchers to define an initial HTA plan and subsequently find, select and analyse relevant resources. Diverse sources of evidence, including scientific, non-scientific and grey literature databases, as well as practice-based evidence were considered.
Results: This methodology allows for large scale, multi-faceted systematic review of the rehabilitation literature despite a restrictive timeframe, limited systematic reviews and RCTs, coupled with evidence from qualitative studies. This HTA developed an adapted evaluation approach addressing the reality of physical rehabilitation while presenting scientific information in a timely manner to support decision-makers.
Conclusions: Applying this strategy will make the realisation of systematic reviews more accessible in the field of physical rehabilitation to address problems which are relevant for multiple centers.
In the field of physical rehabilitation, HTA, which traditionally rely on systemic reviews, are often more difficult to conduct since there are few randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Moreover there is a prevalence of qualitative literature resulting from the psychosocial aspects inherent to the field. In order to complete the HTA on comparing group and individual interventions, the methodology in gathering and evaluating evidence was adapted to address this reality.
Objectives: To develop a methodology to gather, filter and evaluate the evidence for decision-making in physical rehabilitation efficiently.
Methods: Unique combinations of filters and databases and a rubric for mixed-methods analysis were used by the HTA team. The process necessitated a close collaboration between clinicians, information specialists and researchers to define an initial HTA plan and subsequently find, select and analyse relevant resources. Diverse sources of evidence, including scientific, non-scientific and grey literature databases, as well as practice-based evidence were considered.
Results: This methodology allows for large scale, multi-faceted systematic review of the rehabilitation literature despite a restrictive timeframe, limited systematic reviews and RCTs, coupled with evidence from qualitative studies. This HTA developed an adapted evaluation approach addressing the reality of physical rehabilitation while presenting scientific information in a timely manner to support decision-makers.
Conclusions: Applying this strategy will make the realisation of systematic reviews more accessible in the field of physical rehabilitation to address problems which are relevant for multiple centers.