Defining and identifying critical elements of, and lessons learned from addressing, 'operational readiness' for public health emergency events, including COVID-19: a scoping review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Much is known around public health preparedness and response phases. However, between the two phases is operational readiness that comprises the immediate actions needed to respond to a developing risk or hazard. Currently, emergency readiness is embedded in multiple frameworks and policy documents related to the health emergency cycle. However, knowledge about operational readiness' critical readiness components and actions required by countries to respond to public health eminent threat is not well known. Therefore, we aim to define and identify the critical elements of 'operational readiness' for public health emergencies, including COVID-19, and identify lessons learnt from addressing it, to inform the WHO Operational Readiness Framework. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a scoping review following the Joanna Briggs Institute guidance. Reporting will be according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist. MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science databases and grey literature will be searched and exported into an online systematic review software (eg, Rayyan in this case) for review. The review team, which apart from scoping review methodological experts include content experts in health systems and public health and emergency medicine, prepared an a priori study protocol in consultation with WHO representatives. ATLAS.ti V.9 will be used to conduct thematic data analysis as well as store, organise and retrieve data. Data analysis and presentation will be carried out by five reviewers. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This review will reveal new insights, knowledge and lessons learnt that will translate into an operational framework for readiness actions. In consultation with WHO, findings will be disseminated as appropriate (eg, through professional bodies, conferences and research papers). No ethics approvals are required as no humans will be involved in data collection. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: This rapid scoping review has been registered on Open Science Framework (doi:10.17605/OSF.IO/6SYAH).

Telerehabilitation during the COVID-19 pandemic in Sweden: a survey of use and perceptions among physiotherapists treating people with neurological diseases or older adults.

BACKGROUND : Telerehabilitation, i.e. rehabilitation at a distance using Information and Communication Technology (ICT), is a promising avenue for improving health among people with neurological diseases or older adults who often experience limited access to services. Still, little is known about physiotherapists' use, perceptions and needs with regards to telerehabilitation services. AIMS: To describe physiotherapists use and perceptions of, as well as needs for, telerehabilitation services for the rehabilitation of people with neurological diseases or older adults in Sweden. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, an author-created survey was sent out to members of the Swedish Association of Physiotherapists including questions about the use and perceptions of existing telerehabilitation services (e.g. telephone, internet-based applications and mobile applications) as well as needs of future telerehabilitation services. The results were presented descriptively as numbers and percentages. RESULTS: Three hundred seven physiotherapists were included in this study with 139 (45%) treating people with neurological diseases and 168 (55%) treating older adults. Most respondents did not provide telerehabilitation before (74%) or during (51%) the COVID-19 pandemic. Telephone, which was predominantly used for administrative tasks, was the most frequent utilised ICT used by 68% of the physiotherapist using ICTs several days/week. Few respondents used internet-based applications (12%), mobile applications (3%) or SMS services (8%) and videoconferencing (3%). A majority of the respondents were interested in ICT (78%), felt comfortable using ICT (57%) and were interested in learning how ICT can be used in rehabilitation (92%). Still, few respondents perceived that people with neurological diseases or older adults can use existing ICTs for rehabilitation purposes (18%) and that existing reimbursement system within health care facilitates remote rehabilitation (16%). Important functionality of future ICT perceived by physiotherapists covered patient communication (e.g. chat, SMS and video), assessments (e.g. digital surveys and assessment of physical activity) and treatment (e.g. exercise prescription). CONCLUSION: While physiotherapists had an overall positive perception to use and willingness to learn about telerehabilitation, few used telerehabilitation services before nor during the COVID-19 pandemic and they also perceived multilevel barriers for implementation, ranging from patients ability to use ICT to existing reimbursement systems within health care. Our findings emphasize the need to strengthen the expertise regarding remote services among physiotherapists.