Article

Stroke rehabilitation clinicians are responsible for offering quality
services through evidence-based practices. How is this role fulfilled on a daily
basis? OBJECTIVES: (1) To explore the perceptions, experiences, and attitudes of
rehabilitation professionals regarding their scholar role; (2) To identify
factors that facilitate or hinder this role in their practices. METHOD:
Qualitative design of a phenomenological orientation. Face-to-face interviews
conducted with professionals with at least 1 year experience in stroke
rehabilitation using a pre-tested interview guide. Transcripts were coded using
QDA-Miner software. RESULTS: Mean age of the participants was 40.7 years +/-
11.2. Participants were mostly women (n = 9/11). The role of scholar emerged as
not having great value. Main themes (5) emerging from the analysis are emphasis
on tacit knowledge; experience and clinical intuition leading to self-confidence
and comfort in clinical practice; dissatisfaction with the lack of knowledge
sharing among clinicians; importance of diversifying clinical tasks; and the
underdevelopment of reflective practice. Four factors identified as influencing
the role of scholar: motivation, critical incident as a main trigger of
reflective practice, interns facilitating reflective practice, and lack of time.
CONCLUSION: From these results emerged questions about measures to encourage the
scholar role and facilitate reflective practice in stroke rehabilitation.
Implications for Rehabilitation Reflective practice has to be encouraged in
professional rehabilitation of stroke. Managers' involvement is crucial to
promote and support the role of scholar among professionals in stroke
rehabilitation. The updated knowledge and networking from reading scientific
paper, participation in trainings and conferences should be systematically
disseminated.

Langue : ANGLAIS