ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to identify key factors affecting research capacity and engagement of allied health professionals working in a large metropolitan health service. Identifying such factors will assist in determining strategies for building research capacity in allied health.Materials and methodsA total of 276 allied health professionals working within the Sydney Local Health District (SLHD) completed the Research Capacity in Context Tool (RCCT) that measures research capacity and culture across three domains: organization, team, and individual. An exploratory factor analysis was undertaken to identify common themes within each of these domains. Correlations were performed between demographic variables and the identified factors to determine possible relationships.ResultsResearch capacity and culture success/skill levels were reported to be higher within the organization and team domains compared to the individual domain (median [interquartile range, IQR] 6 [5–8], 6 [5–8], 5 [3–7], respectively; Friedman χ2(2)=42.04, p<0.001). Exploratory factor analyses were performed to identify factors that were perceived by allied health respondents to affect research capacity. Factors identified within the organization domain were infrastructure for research (eg, funds and equipment) and research culture (eg, senior manager’s support for research); within the team domain the factors were research orientation (eg, dissemination of results at research seminars) and research support (eg, providing staff research training). Within the individual domain, only one factor was identified which was the research skill of the individual (eg, literature evaluation, submitting ethics applications and data analysis, and writing for publication).ConclusionThe reported skill/success levels in research were lower for the individual domain compared to the organization or team domains. Key factors were identified in each domain that impacted on allied health research capacity. As these factors were different in each domain, various strategies may be required at the level of the organization, team, and individual to support and build allied health research capacity.

The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of mobilisation on respiratory and haemodynamic variables in the intubated, ventilated abdominal surgical patient. Mobilisation was defined as the progression of activity from supine, to sitting over the edge of the bed, standing, walking on the spot for one minute, sitting out of bed initially, and sitting out of bed for 20 minutes. Seventeen patients with age (mean +/- SD) 71.4 +/- 7.1 years satisfied inclusion criteria. Respiratory and haemodynamic parameters were measured in each of the above positions and compared with supine. In the 15 subjects who completed the protocol, standing resulted in significant increases in minute ventilation (VE) from 15.1 +/- 3.1 l/min in supine to 21.3 +/- 3.6 l/min in standing (p < 0.001). The increase in VE in standing was achieved by significant increases in tidal volume (VT) from 712.7 +/- 172.8 ml to 883.4 +/- 196.3 ml (p = 0.008) and in respiratory rate (fR) from 21.4 +/- 5.0 breaths/min to 24.9 +/- 4.5 breaths/min (p = 0.03). No further increases were observed in these parameters beyond standing when activity was progressed to walking on the spot for one minute. When supine values were compared with walking on the spot for one minute, inspiratory flow rates (VT/TI) increased significantly from 683 +/- 131.8 ml/sec to 985.1 +/- 162.3 ml/sec (p = 0.001) with significant increases in rib cage displacement (p = 0.001) and no significant increase in abdominal displacement (p = 0.23). Arterial blood gases displayed no improvements following mobilisation. Changes in VT, fR, and VE were largely due to positional changes when moving from supine to standing.

A CNRP may be beneficial for patients with advanced cancer and the ACS, but identification of patients who are likely to stay on the program is needed.

The aim of the study was to determine if there was a difference in 6-minute walk distance (6MWD) when two 6-minute walk tests (6MWTs) were performed at the initial assessment prior to attendance at the pulmonary hypertension (PH) clinic and at the 6-month follow-up. Two 6MWTs were performed at both visits on a 32-m continuous track in the physiotherapy hospital outpatient setting using standard instructions and encouragement. Two hundred and fourteen participants completed two 6MWTs at the initial assessment and 71 participants at the 6-month follow-up (mean (standard deviation) age: 57 (16) years; body mass index: 27 (6) kg/m2). Using the better 6MWT, the mean distances walked were 429 (136) and 447 (130) m, respectively. There was a significant increase in 6MWD when a second 6MWT was performed at initial assessment (mean difference [95% confidence interval (CI)]: 19 m (14–24), p < 0.001) and at the follow-up (mean difference [95% CI]: 19 m (10–27), p < 0.001) but not in those who walked <300 m at the initial assessment (mean difference [95% CI]: 9 m (−5 to 22), p = 0.208). There were no adverse events during testing. Prior to attendance at the PH Clinic when people are asked to perform the 6MWT for the first time and at the 6-month follow-up, two walk tests should be performed in order to eliminate a learning effect and to ensure accuracy of measurement.

PurposeThe aim of this observational cross-sectional study was to determine if allied health professionals working in a large metropolitan health district were meeting the minimal physical activity (PA) recommendations and the proportion that occupational PA contributed to the recommended PA levels. A secondary aim was to determine possible relationships between self-report questionnaire measures of PA and PA measured by accelerometry.Materials and methodsAllied health professionals, working in the Sydney Local Health District (SLHD) in 2016–2017, completed the Active Australia Survey (AAS), Occupational Sitting and Physical Activity Questionnaire (OSPAQ), International Physical Activity Questionnaire Long form (IPAQ-L), and wore the ActiGraph GT1M accelerometer for 7 days consecutively.ResultsBased on accelerometry results, allied health professionals (N=126) spent a mean (SD) of 51 (23) minutes in moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA)/day, representing 171% of the total recommended MVPA/day, with work contributing 76% to this recommendation. Participants walked a mean of 10,077 (2,766) steps/day, meeting 100% of the recommended 10,000 steps/day, with work contributing 54% to this recommendation. Sedentary behaviors were predominant throughout the entire day and work day. Compared with the ActiGraph MVPA time measurements, AAS MVPA time showed a fair level of agreement [intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC)=0.44, P<0.01], while OSPAQ and IPAQ-L MVPA time showed no agreement (ICC=0.05, P=0.27; ICC=0.13, P=0.10, respectively).ConclusionAllied health professionals working in a large metropolitan health district met the daily PA recommendations based on accelerometry measures but tended to overreport their MVPA on self-report questionnaires.