Purpose: The aim of this study was to develop a tool to assess physical therapists' knowledge, skills, and judgement in performing airway suctioning with intubated and non-intubated adults. Method: A modified Delphi methodology was used to develop the tool and to evaluate its sensibility (i.e., common-sense nature). Participants were experienced cardiorespiratory physical therapists who perform airway suctioning and physical therapists employed in academic positions related to cardiorespiratory physical therapy at Canadian universities. Round 1 focused on refining which items to include in the tool, Round 2 focused on finalizing the items, and Round 3 focused on evaluating a preliminary version of the tool. Results: A total of 34 individuals participated in Round 1, 30 participated in Round 2, and 25 participated in Round 3. A literature review identified 11 relevant domains and 69 supporting competencies. In Round 1, consensus was achieved for all domains; however, it was borderline for the professionalism domain. Multiple participants suggested that it was redundant because it is a global requirement for all physical therapists. Consensus was also achieved for 64 of the 69 supporting competencies; however, it was borderline for 5 of these items, and 5 achieved no consensus. In Round 2, participants rated a series of recommendations related to items requiring further consideration, as well as 9 new items suggested by the participants in Round 1. In Round 3, the preliminary tool was found to be globally sensible, but concerns were expressed about the inclusion of redundant factors and the tool's length. The tool was revised, resulting in a tool with 4 domains, 6 sub-domains and 43 supporting competencies, as well as an item rating the individual's overall performance. Conclusions: The final-round sensibility questionnaire provided preliminary evidence of the tool's face and content validity. We will investigate the tool's measurement properties in a future study.

The use of e-health can lead to several positive outcomes. However, the potential for e-health to improve healthcare is partially dependent on its ease of use. In order to determine the usability for any technology, rigorously developed and appropriate measures must be chosen.

To identify psychometrically tested questionnaires that measure usability of e-health tools, and to appraise their generalizability, attributes coverage, and quality.

We conducted a systematic review of studies that measured usability of e-health tools using four databases (Scopus, PubMed, CINAHL, and HAPI). Non-primary research, studies that did not report measures, studies with children or people with cognitive limitations, and studies about assistive devices or medical equipment were systematically excluded. Two authors independently extracted information including: questionnaire name, number of questions, scoring method, item generation, and psychometrics using a data extraction tool with pre-established categories and a quality appraisal scoring table.

Using a broad search strategy, 5,558 potentially relevant papers were identified. After removing duplicates and applying exclusion criteria, 35 articles remained that used 15 unique questionnaires. From the 15 questionnaires, only 5 were general enough to be used across studies. Usability attributes covered by the questionnaires were: learnability (15), efficiency (12), and satisfaction (11). Memorability (1) was the least covered attribute. Quality appraisal showed that face/content (14) and construct (7) validity were the most frequent types of validity assessed. All questionnaires reported reliability measurement. Some questionnaires scored low in the quality appraisal for the following reasons: limited validity testing (7), small sample size (3), no reporting of user centeredness (9) or feasibility estimates of time, effort, and expense (7).

Existing questionnaires provide a foundation for research on e-health usability. However, future research is needed to broaden the coverage of the usability attributes and psychometric properties of the available questionnaires.

Physical rehabilitation of lung transplant candidates and recipients plays an important in optimizing physical function prior to transplant and facilitating recovery of function post-transplant. As medical and surgical interventions in lung transplantation have evolved over time, there has been a demographic shift of individuals undergoing lung transplantation including older individuals, those with multiple co-morbidites, and candidates with respiratory failure requiring bridging to transplantation. These changes have an impact on the rehabilitation needs of lung transplant candidates and recipients. This review provides a practical approach to rehabilitation based on research and clinical practice at our transplant centre. It focuses on functional assessment and exercise prescription during an uncomplicated and complicated clinical course in the pre-transplant, early and late post-transplant periods. The target audience includes clinicians involved in pre- and post-transplant patient care and rehabilitation researchers.