Barriers and Facilitators to the Acceptance of eHealth Interventions by Dutch Pediatric Physical Therapists in Times of the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Mixed-Methods Approach.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic created an urgent need for eHealth as the relevance of infection control and social distancing continues. Evidence describing the acceptability of implementing eHealth into pediatric physical therapy services is limited. PURPOSE: To investigate the determinants of eHealth acceptance by Dutch pediatric physical therapists during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A mixed-methods approach was used. It included a quantitative exploratory questionnaire of 154 pediatric physical therapists and qualitative in-depth interviews of 16 pediatric physical therapists. RESULTS: The eHealth interventions were beneficial for collaboration between health care professionals and in addition to face-to-face therapy. eHealth interventions were, however, found to be unsuitable especially in the diagnostic phase. Barriers to more extensive application include costs, technical difficulties, and a perceived negative attitude of children. CONCLUSION: Pediatric physical therapists used eHealth interventions extensively in times of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the acceptance of eHealth interventions is dependent on the pediatric physical therapist's perception of usefulness in private practice, rehabilitation setting, or clinical hospital.

Cross-Cultural Validity: Canadian Norm Values of the Alberta Infant Motor Scale Evaluated for Dutch Infants.

PURPOSE: To examine whether the Canadian normative values of the Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS) are appropriate for Dutch infants. METHOD: In a cross-sectional study, 499 infants developing typically (0.5-19 months) were assessed using the AIMS home video method. The scaling method was used for calculating item locations of the Dutch sample, and Welch test to compare Canadian and Dutch raw scores. RESULTS: THE: AIMS items (45 of 58) met the criterion for stable regression to calculate item locations of the Dutch data set and compare these with the Canadian data set. Dutch infants passed 42 of 45 items at an older age. Most monthly age groups of Dutch infants had lower mean AIMS scores. CONCLUSION: The Canadian norms are not appropriate for the Dutch study sample. Dutch infants appear to develop in a similar sequence but at a slower rate. This has implications regarding the clinical use of the AIMS in the Netherlands.