As part of the conference program we have scheduled workshops which cover multidisciplinary topics.
Registered conference attendees have free access to the workshops.
However people who want to attend the workshops only can do so for a fee of R100.00 for a 1 hour workshop and R200.00 for a 3 hour workshop.
|
Theme |
Information |
|
Management of patients with HIV/AIDS: A Physiotherapist’s perspective Speaker: Dr Ester Nkandu (Zambia) Head: Department of Physiotherapy, University of Zambia
|
Monday 11:30-12:30 Venue: Engineering building I lecture hall 1-16 Cost: R100.00 |
|
Knowledge translation: Experiences of the Canadian Stroke Network of excellence in Rehabilitation of Persons after Stroke. Speaker: Prof Carol Richards, Department of Rehabilitation, University of Laval, Quebec and Research Director, Center for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation and Social integration
|
Monday 6 October Time 14:30-17:30 Venue: Engineering building II UP, lecture hall 1-2 Cost R200.00 |
|
Exploring the essentials of service learning in physiotherapy education Prof Theresa Lorenzo University of Cape Town |
Tuesday 7 October Time: 9:30-10:30 Venue Ing 1 1-2 |
|
A Practical Workshop on Seating the Wheelchair User – A Fresh Approach Mr Deon Bührs: Private practitioner, Rita Henn and Partners; Manager of the Seating clinic (Public-private partnership between Department of Physiotherapy UP, and Rita Henn & Partners) |
Tuesday 7 October Time 14:30-17:30 Venue: Theology building 1-28 Cost R200.00 |
|
Measuring and Managing Pain and Performance: In real and virtual environments Prof Maureen Simmonds, Professor and Director |
Tuesday 7 October Time 14:30-17:20 Venue: Engineering building II lecture hall 4.21 Cost R200.00
|
|
Woman’s Health Mrs Hester van Aswegen. Private practitioner
|
Wednesday 8 October Time: 9:20-11:00 Venue: To be announced Cost R100.00 |
Yours sincerely
Congress organizing committee
Registration for the workshops by 3 October: [email protected]
Registration for the conference: [email protected]
Web address: www.up.ac.za/physiotherapy
Abstracts:
Title:
Knowledge Translation Experiences of the Canadian Stroke Network of Excellence in the Rehabilitation of Persons after Stroke
Presenting author:
Carol L. Richards, PhD, DU, PT, FCAHS
Professor, Dept. of Rehabilitation and Director of the CIRRIS Research Center
Holder of a Tier 1 Canada Research Chair in Rehabilitation and the Laval University Research Chair in Cerebral Palsy
Contributing authors:
This work is presented in collaboration with members of the SCORE team of the Canadian Stroke Network (CSN): M. Bayley, S. Wood-Dauphinee, M. Harrison, R. Teasell, S. Barreca, S. Black, L. Brosseau, J. Desrosiers, F. Malouin, I. Graham, S. Jaglal, J. Jutai, N. Korner-Bitensky, M. Lewis, R. Martino and N. Mayo
Institution and Country:
Department of Rehabilitation, Faculty of Medicine, Laval University and Centre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation and Social Integration (CIRRIS), Quebec City, P. Quebec, Canada
Introduction:
The purpose of this course is to present and discuss the model for knowledge translation (KT) of best practices developed by the researchers in theme IV (Rehabilitation) of the Canadian Stroke Network (CSN) of Excellence over the last six years. After a brief introduction of the CSN, and the background leading up to the decision of members of the Rehabilitation Theme to concentrate on KT, the first project initiated, the Stroke Canada Optimization of Rehabilitation through Evidence (SCORE) project will be outlined. The SCORE project: 1) determined 5 research priorities (areas of stroke rehabilitation that required further study) and 3 areas ready for KT and 2) carried out a pilot randomized controlled trial designed to promote and evaluate the uptake of best practice guidelines developed by the study team in 2 areas ready for KT in 5 Rehabilitation units across the country. In order to develop these best practice guidelines, the SCORE used the Stroke Rehabilitation Evidence Based Review (SREBR, www.SREBR.org) website developed by Dr Robert Teasell and his team at the University of Western Ontario, in addition to many other reviews and the expertise of the team members. Published practice guidelines were evaluated and the team then developed evidence-based recommendations that incorporated chosen elements of published guidelines and modifications made by the team (available on the CSN website: www.canadianstrokenetwork.ca). Practice protocols for the SCORE project were developed to implement these recommendations. The results of the SCORE pilot project were then used to refine the methodology for a randomized controlled trial (SCORE-IT) currently underway that is designed to evaluate the implementation of best practice guidelines in 20 rehabilitation units across Canada.
Three other projects spearheaded by Dr Nicol Korner-Bitensky at McGill University in collaboration with members of the SCORE team completed the KT activities of theme IV of the CSN over this period. The first project documented the type of rehabilitation practiced in Canada prior to the SCORE project on the basis of structured interviews of over 1600 rehabilitation professionals (physical therapists, occupational therapists, physicians and speech therapists). The second project developed a website called SrokEngine (/elearning.strokengine.org/about.html) that summarizes the literature analyses and presents the information with 3 levels of detail. The third is also a website, StrokeAssess, that summarizes the information available on outcome measures in rehabilitation. These two websites are funded by the CSN as well as the Heart & Stroke Foundation and the Quebec Rehabilitation Research Network (REPAR), and available in both English and French. The workshop will end with a discussion of the impact of the determination of research priorities by the SCORE team including the uptake of these priorities by the funding agencies and the decision of the SCORE team to develop a new project that is currently underway to address the priority of community integration for persons after stroke.
Requirements for participation in the workshop:
a) Access to the following websites:
/elearning.strokengine.org/about.html
b) Required reading:
(When you have registered the Department of Physiotherapy will make the reading material available for attendants)
1. Bayley MT, Hurdowar A, Teasell R, Wood-Dauphinee S, Korner-Bitensky N, Richards CL, Harrison M, Jutai JW. Priorities for stroke rehabilitation research and knowledge translation: Results of a 2003 Canadian Stroke Network Consensus Conference. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2007;88(4):526–528.
2. Hurdowar A, Graham ID, Bayley M, Harrison M, Wood-Dauphinee S, Bhogal S. Quality of stroke rehabilitation clinical practice guidelines. J Eval Clin Pract 2007;13(4):657-64.
3. Teasell RW and Roth E et al (eds). Stroke Rehabilitation Evidence-Based Review: Part 1. In: Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation Volume 10, No 1 Spring 2003.
4. Teasell RW and Roth E et al (eds). Stroke Rehabilitation Evidence-Based Review: Part 2. In: Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation Volume 10, No 2, Summer 2003.
1) To introduce the model for Knowledge Translation developed by the Rehabilitation Theme of the Canadian Stroke Network of Excellence over the last 6 years
2) To demonstrate the availability of best practice information on the world-wide web by introducing the material developed by the members of the CSN team
3) To encourage the uptake of best practice guidelines in the rehabilitation of persons after stroke
Keywords:
Stroke, Knowledge Translation, Best Practices, Canadian Stroke Network
Presenting author physical address:
Dr Carol L. Richards
Director, Centre de recherche en réadaptation et en intégration sociale (CIRRIS)
Institut de réadaptation en déficience physique de Québec (IRDPQ)
Site Hamel , 525 Boul. Wilfrid-Hamel Est, local H-1110
Québec (P.Qué) G1M 2S8
Telephone number:
01-418-529-9141 ext 6038d
Fax:
01- 418-529-3548
E-mail:
Title: A Practical Workshop on Seating the Wheelchair User – A Fresh Approach
Presenting author
Deon Buhrs
Institution and Country:
Private practitioner, Rita Henn and Partners;
Manager of the Seating clinic (Public-private partnership between Department of Physiotherapy UP, Netcare and Rita Henn & Partners) , Johannesburg, South Africa
Aim(s) of the workshop
To give Physiotherapists an insight into the effect of seating system adjustments and to offer a methodical, objective approach to wheelchair seating and empowerment of the patients in seating and pressure relief.
_______________________________________________________________
Title: Measuring and managing, pain and performance: in real and virtual environments.
Presenting Author
Professor Maureen J. Simmonds PT, PhD
Director, School of Physical and Occupational Therapy, Associate Dean, Faculty of Medicine, McGill University, 3654, Promenade-Sir-William-Osler, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. H3G 1Y5
Pain and the impact of pain on function is the most common reason that individuals seek health care. Pain and movement dysfunction are invariant sensory and motor expressions regardless of the specific injury, disease or disorder (Simmonds, 2002). They are also complex, inter-related problems and are often accompanied by symptom clusters that include fatigue, depressed mood and psychosocial distress. Good medical management can alleviate these problems whereas inadequate management can aggravate them, add to the individual’s distress, and be a source of frustration for both patient and practitioner (Simmonds, 1999). Optimum management of pain and movement dysfunction is predicated on a sound and comprehensive understanding of pain and movement problems, the bidirectional and complex relationships among the problems, and the factors that influence them (Simmonds et al, 2005; Novy et al, 1999; Novy et al, 2002; Cunha Filho et al, 2000; Lee et al, 2003). It is a given, that optimum management is predicated on the appropriate selection, application and interpretation of assessment measures (Simmonds et al, 1998; Simmonds, 1999; Lee et al, 2000; Novy et al, 2002; Simmonds 2002). The aim of this paper is to present and discuss the assessment of pain and its impact on individual’s motor performance and physical function
Research on pain and physical function using physical performance tests has shown that regardless of whether pain and impairment is a consequence of musculo-skeletal injury or systemic disease such as cancers, pain-free individuals outperform those with pain in terms of movement speed and endurance ability across a variety of performance tests (e.g. walk and reach tests, sit-to-stand, and repeated trunk flexion tests) (Simmonds et al, 1998; Simmonds, 2002; Simmonds et al, 2005). Slow movements are costly because the burden of time inefficiency is added to the burden of dealing with pain and with impairment. Moreover, slow movements are relatively inefficient in terms of their physiological energy requirements. For a similar level of effort, individuals with pain are able to perform significantly less (Lee et al, 2002).
In general, slow movements are characterized by fractionated and extraneous movement patterns. Slow movements are associated with a relatively high level of muscle activity (amplitude and duration) throughout the task compared to fast movements (Simmonds 2002). It is plausible that this movement inefficiency during task performance is one reason why individuals with pain are not as de-conditioned or unfit as their general level of activity would suggest (i.e. moving slowly is physically challenging). Our research has shown that individuals with pain move slower across a range of self-selected movement speeds i.e. slow, preferred and fast. We have also shown that patients’ have errors in judgement of expected pain vs. actual pain experienced (during task performance). Expectations of pain are underestimated at slow speeds but overestimated at preferred and fast speeds. Although pain reduction can increase preferred movement speed it is not clear whether this increase in preferred movement speed results in a simultaneous decrease in the energy cost or perceived effort.
Preliminary work using speed targeted treatment shows promise in terms of reducing physical dysfunction. It is plausible that improvements in movement speed will reduce the impact of pain and fatigue.
References
1. Cunha Filho IT, Simmonds MJ, Protas EJ, Jones S. Back pain, physical function, and estimates of aerobic capacity: what are the relationships among methods and measures? Amer Journal Phys Med Rehabil 2002 81:913-920
2. Lee CE, Simmonds MJ, Novy DM, Jones SC. A comparison of self-report and clinician measured physical function among patients with low back pain. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 2000, 82: 227-231
5. Novy DM, Simmonds MJ, Olson S, Lee CE. Gender differences in Physical Performance in individuals with and without low back pain. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 80:195-198,1999
6. Novy DM Simmonds MJ, Lee CE Physical Performance Tasks: What are the Underlying Constructs? Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2002 Jan;83(1):44-7.
7. Simmonds MJ, Olson S, Novy D, Jones S, Hussein T, Lee CE, Radwan H, Physical Performance Tests: Are They Psychometrically Sound and Clinically Useful for Patients with Low Back Pain? Spine 1998; 23:22; 2412-2421
8. Simmonds MJ, Pain and Performance, What are the measures and what do they mean? In: Max M (Ed) Pain Clinical Update IASP Press, Seattle, 1999
9. Simmonds MJ, Physical Function in Patients with Cancer. Psychometric Characteristics and Clinical Usefulness of a Physical Performance Test Battery. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management 2002 24:404-414
10. Simmonds MJ. The effect of pain and illness on movement: Assessment methods and their meanings. In: Giamberadino M (Ed) Pain Clinical Update IASP Press, Seattle, 2002, 179-187
11. Simmonds MJ, Novy DM Sandoval R, The Influence of Pain and Fatigue on Physical Performance and Health Status in Ambulatory Patients with HIV. Clinical Journal of Pain. 2005 21:3, 200-206
Copyright © University of Pretoria 2025. All rights reserved.
Virtual Campus
Get Social With Us
Download the UP Mobile App