Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T09:41:01.050Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Characterising the impact of BRAINSPaN: a multidisciplinary community of practice for clinicians and researchers in the brain impairment field

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 May 2021

Dana Wong Open the ORCID record for Dana Wong [Opens in a new window] ,
Joanne Steel ,
Katharine Baker  and
Emmah Doig
Dana Wong*
Affiliation:
School of Psychology & Public Health, La Trobe University, Bundoora, VIC, Australia Turner Institute for Brain and Mental Health, School of Psychological Sciences, Monash University, Clayton, VIC, Australia
Joanne Steel
Affiliation:
School of Humanities and Social Sciences, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia
Katharine Baker
Affiliation:
School of Psychology & Public Health, La Trobe University, Bundoora, VIC, Australia
Emmah Doig
Affiliation:
The School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
*
*Corresponding author: Email: d.wong@latrobe.edu.au
Get access

Abstract

Background:

Communities of practice can facilitate the sharing and translation of knowledge. BRAINSPaN is a multidisciplinary community of practice of clinicians, researchers and students in the brain impairment field that was launched in Australia in June 2017. We aimed to investigate the impact of BRAINSPaN on multidisciplinary collaboration and on knowledge, skills and confidence in domains of practice of interest to members.

Methods:

We surveyed BRAINSPaN members over three time points at 1-month (n = 117), 7-months (n = 69) and 14-months (n = 46) post-launch. Content analysis of posts to the BRAINSPaN listserv was also conducted to identify their purpose and content.

Results:

Increasing access to new research findings and increasing interaction with others in the brain impairment field were the two main goals for survey respondents’ participation in BRAINSPaN. At 7- and 14-months post-launch, these were also the most commonly achieved goals and most frequently cited benefits of BRAINSPaN participation. Cognitive rehabilitation and behaviour management were the most frequently reported practice domains of interest, as well as being two of the five most common topics of BRAINSPaN posts over the survey period. There was a significant increase in self-reported knowledge for participants’ top two domains of interest, but no change in skills or confidence.

Conclusions:

BRAINSPaN has the potential to serve as a vehicle for the sharing and translation of knowledge in the brain impairment field. Combining other forms of dissemination with communities of practice, such as workshops and clinical mentoring, may be needed to also influence the development of skills and confidence in practice areas.

Keywords

Community of practicebrain impairmentknowledge translationmultidisciplinary collaborationclinical skills
Type
Original Article
Information
Brain Impairment , Volume 23 , Issue 2 , September 2022 , pp. 216 - 230
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Australasian Society for the Study of Brain Impairment

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Balas, E. A., & Boren, S. A. (2000). Managing clinical knowledge for health care improvement. In Bemmel, J. & McCray, A. (Eds.), Yearbook of Medical Informatics 2000: Patient-Centered Systems (pp. 65–70). Stuttgart, Germany: Schattauer Verlagsgesellschaft mbH.Google Scholar
Bermejo-Caja, C. J., Koatz, D., Orrego, C., Perestelo-Perez, L., Gonzalez-Gonzalez, A. I., Ballester, M., … Martinez-Marcos, M. (2019). Acceptability and feasibility of a virtual community of practice to primary care professionals regarding patient empowerment: a qualitative pilot study.(Report). BMC Health Services Research, 19(1). doi: 10.1186/s12913-019-4185-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Camden, C., Rivard, L. M., Hurtubise, K., Héguy, L., & Berbari, J. (2017). Can a community of practice improve physical therapists’ self-perceived practice in developmental coordination disorder? Physical Therapy, 97(7), 746–755. doi: 10.1093/ptj/pzx041 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cheung, C. M. K., Lee, M. K. O., & Lee, Z. W. Y. (2013). Understanding the continuance intention of knowledge sharing in online communities of practice through the post-knowledge-sharing evaluation processes. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 64(7), 1357–1374. doi: 10.1002/asi.22854 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daudelin, D. H., Selker, H. P., & Leslie, L. K. (2015). Applying process improvement methods to clinical and translational fesearch: Conceptual framework and case examples. Clinical and Translational Science, 8(6), 779–786. doi: 10.1111/cts.12326 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Evans, C., Yeung, E., Markoulakis, R., & Guilcher, S. (2014). An online community of practice to support evidence-based physiotherapy practice in manual therapy. Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 34(4), 215–223. doi: 10.1002/chp.21253 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gauvreau, C. A., Le Dorze, G., Kairy, D., & Croteau, C. (2019). Evaluation of a community of practice for speech-language pathologists in aphasia rehabilitation: a logic analysis. BMC health services research, 19(1), 530. doi: 10.1186/s12913-019-4338-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoffmann, T., Desha, L., & Verrall, K. (2011). Evaluating an online occupational therapy community of practice and its role in supporting occupational therapy practice. Australian occupational therapy journal, 58(5), 337–345. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1630.2011.00954.x.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hsieh, H.-F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288. doi: 10.1177/1049732305276687 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hurtubise, K., Rivard, L., Héguy, L., Berbari, J., & Camden, C. (2016). Virtual knowledge brokering: describing the roles and strategies used by knowledge brokers in a pediatric physiotherapy virtual community of practice. Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 36(3), 186–194. doi: 10.1097/CEH.0000000000000101 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, L. C., Grimshaw, J. M., Nielsen, C., Judd, M., Coyte, P. C., & Graham, I. D. (2009). Evolution of Wenger’s concept of community of practice. Implementation science, 4(1), 11. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-4-11 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pagan, E., Ownsworth, T., McDonald, S., Fleming, J., Honan, C., & Togher, L. (2015). A survey of multidisciplinary clinicians working in rehabilitation for people with traumatic brain injury. Brain Impairment, 16(3), 173–195. doi: 10.1017/BrImp.2015.34 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ponsford, J., Sloan, S., & Snow, P. (2012). Traumatic Brain Injury Rehabilitation for Everyday Adaptive Living, 2nd Edition. Hoboken: Taylor and Francis.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pyrko, I., Dörfler, V., & Eden, C. (2017). Thinking together: what makes communities of practice work? Human relations, 70(4), 389–409. doi: 10.1177/0018726716661040\ CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Quinn, E. D., Cook, A., & Rowland, C. (2019). An online community of practice to improve intervention for individuals with complex communication needs. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 35(2), 142–147. doi: 10.1080/07434618.2019.1566400 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Snoswell, C., & Smith, A. (2020). Want to Skype your GP to avoid exposure to the coronavirus? Here’s what you need to know about the new telehealth option. The Conversation.Google Scholar
Taherdoost, H. (2017). Determining sample size; how to calculate survey sample size. International Journal of Economics and Management Systems, 2, 237–239.Google Scholar
Terry, D. R., Nguyen, H., Peck, B., Smith, A., & Phan, H. (2020). Communities of practice: A systematic review and meta-synthesis of what it means and how it really works among nursing students and novices. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 29(3-4), 370–380. doi: 10.1111/jocn.15100 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Togher, S. L., Wiseman-Hakes, S. C., Douglas, S. J., Stergiou-Kita, S. M., Ponsford, S. J., Teasell, S. R., … Turkstra, S. L. (2014). INCOG recommendations for management of cognition following traumatic brain injury, part IV: Cognitive communication. Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation, 29(4), 353–368. doi: 10.1097/HTR.0000000000000071 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Valaitis, R. K., Akhtar-Danesh, N., Brooks, F., Binks, S., & Semogas, D. (2011). Online communities of practice as a communication resource for community health nurses working with homeless persons. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 67(6), 1273–1284. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2010.05582.x CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van Heugten, C. M. (2017). Evidence-based treatment. In Wilson, B. A., Winegardner, J., van Heugten, C. M., & Ownsworth, T. (Eds.), Neuropsychological Rehabilitation: The International Handbook. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice : learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolbrink, T. A., Kissoon, N., Mirza, N., & Burns, J. P. (2017). Building a global, online community of practice: The OPENPediatrics World Shared Practices Video Series. 92(5), 676–679. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000001467. PMID: 28441677 Google ScholarPubMed
Wong, D., McKay, A., & Stolwyk, R. (2014). Delivery of psychological interventions by clinical neuropsychologists: Current practice in Australia and implications for training. Australian Psychologist, 49(4), 209–222. doi: 10.1111/ap.12061 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wong, D., McKay, A., Kazantzis, N., & Ponsford, J. (2020). Clinical translation of Cognitive Behavioural Therapy for anxiety and depression - Adapted for Brain Injury (CBT-ABI): How do we train competent clinicians? International Journal of Cognitive Therapy. doi: 10.1007/s41811-020-00079-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Wong et al. supplementary material

Wong et al. supplementary material 1

Download Wong et al. supplementary material(File)
File 31.2 KB
Supplementary material: File

Wong et al. supplementary material

Wong et al. supplementary material 2

Download Wong et al. supplementary material(File)
File 29.7 KB
Supplementary material: File

Wong et al. supplementary material

Wong et al. supplementary material 3

Download Wong et al. supplementary material(File)
File 31.7 KB