Coronary artery bypass grafting is the most frequently performed cardiac surgical procedure. Despite its benefits on survival and quality of life, it is associated with a considerable financial burden on society including sick leave. Our study aimed to explore the barriers that obstruct return to work after coronary artery bypass grafting. We performed a qualitative study with in-depth interviewing of patients 6 months after their surgery. We included ten working patients and interviewed them and their spouses at home. The interviews were transcribed and two investigators independently searched the transcriptions for barriers that had obstructed return to work. Based on the interviews we were able to distinguish four main groups of barriers: 'personal', 'healthcare', 'work' and 'law & regulation.' The personal barriers were subgrouped in affective, physical, cognitive, social and individually determined factors. Conclusion In a qualitative study we showed that personal barriers as well as barriers regarding healthcare, work and law & regulation, were perceived by patients as important factors obstructing return to work after coronary artery bypass grafting. To overcome the identified barriers, the process of return to work could preferably be initiated during the hospital phase, started during cardiac rehabilitation, and coordinated by a case-managing professional.
LINK
Coronary artery bypass grafting is the most frequently performed cardiac surgical procedure. Despite its benefits on survival and quality of life, it is associated with a considerable financial burden on society including sick leave. Our study aimed to explore the barriers that obstruct return to work after coronary artery bypass grafting. We performed a qualitative study with in-depth interviewing of patients 6 months after their surgery. We included ten working patients and interviewed them and their spouses at home. The interviews were transcribed and two investigators independently searched the transcriptions for barriers that had obstructed return to work. Based on the interviews we were able to distinguish four main groups of barriers: 'personal', 'healthcare', 'work' and 'law & regulation.' The personal barriers were subgrouped in affective, physical, cognitive, social and individually determined factors. Conclusion In a qualitative study we showed that personal barriers as well as barriers regarding healthcare, work and law & regulation, were perceived by patients as important factors obstructing return to work after coronary artery bypass grafting. To overcome the identified barriers, the process of return to work could preferably be initiated during the hospital phase, started during cardiac rehabilitation, and coordinated by a case-managing professional.
LINK
BACKGROUND: Sufficient physical activity is important for solid organ transplant recipients (heart, lung, liver, kidney). However, recipients do not meet the recommended amount or required type of physical activity. The perceived barriers to and facilitators of physical activity in this population are largely unknown.METHODS: Semi-structured in depth interviews were conducted with solid organ transplant recipients in order to explore experienced barriers and facilitators. Qualitative methodology with thematic line-by-line analysis was used for analysis, and derived themes were classified into personal and environmental factors.RESULTS: The most important indicated barriers were physical limitations, insufficient energy level, fear, and comorbidities. The most frequently mentioned facilitators included motivation, coping, consequences of (in)activity, routine/habit, goals/goal priority, and responsibility for the transplanted organ. Neutral factors acting as a barrier or facilitator were self-efficacy and expertise of personnel. A comparison of barriers and facilitators between transplant recipient groups yielded no overt differences.CONCLUSION: Several personal and environmental factors were indicated that should be considered in intervention development to increase physical activity behavior in solid organ transplant recipients.
Physical rehabilitation programs revolve around the repetitive execution of exercises since it has been proven to lead to better rehabilitation results. Although beginning the motor (re)learning process early is paramount to obtain good recovery outcomes, patients do not normally see/experience any short-term improvement, which has a toll on their motivation. Therefore, patients find it difficult to stay engaged in seemingly mundane exercises, not only in terms of adhering to the rehabilitation program, but also in terms of proper execution of the movements. One way in which this motivation problem has been tackled is to employ games in the rehabilitation process. These games are designed to reward patients for performing the exercises correctly or regularly. The rewards can take many forms, for instance providing an experience that is engaging (fun), one that is aesthetically pleasing (appealing visual and aural feedback), or one that employs gamification elements such as points, badges, or achievements. However, even though some of these serious game systems are designed together with physiotherapists and with the patients’ needs in mind, many of them end up not being used consistently during physical rehabilitation past the first few sessions (i.e. novelty effect). Thus, in this project, we aim to 1) Identify, by means of literature reviews, focus groups, and interviews with the involved stakeholders, why this is happening, 2) Develop a set of guidelines for the successful deployment of serious games for rehabilitation, and 3) Develop an initial implementation process and ideas for potential serious games. In a follow-up application, we intend to build on this knowledge and apply it in the design of a (set of) serious game for rehabilitation to be deployed at one of the partners centers and conduct a longitudinal evaluation to measure the success of the application of the deployment guidelines.
The research proposal aims to improve the design and verification process for coastal protection works. With global sea levels rising, the Netherlands, in particular, faces the challenge of protecting its coastline from potential flooding. Four strategies for coastal protection are recognized: protection-closed (dikes, dams, dunes), protection-open (storm surge barriers), advancing the coastline (beach suppletion, reclamation), and accommodation through "living with water" concepts. The construction process of coastal protection works involves collaboration between the client and contractors. Different roles, such as project management, project control, stakeholder management, technical management, and contract management, work together to ensure the project's success. The design and verification process is crucial in coastal protection projects. The contract may include functional requirements or detailed design specifications. Design drawings with tolerances are created before construction begins. During construction and final verification, the design is measured using survey data. The accuracy of the measurement techniques used can impact the construction process and may lead to contractual issues if not properly planned. The problem addressed in the research proposal is the lack of a comprehensive and consistent process for defining and verifying design specifications in coastal protection projects. Existing documents focus on specific aspects of the process but do not provide a holistic approach. The research aims to improve the definition and verification of design specifications through a systematic review of contractual parameters and survey methods. It seeks to reduce potential claims, improve safety, enhance the competitiveness of maritime construction companies, and decrease time spent on contractual discussions. The research will have several outcomes, including a body of knowledge describing existing and best practices, a set of best practices and recommendations for verifying specific design parameters, and supporting documents such as algorithms for verification.
The research, supported by our partners, sets out to understand the drivers and barriers to sustainable logistics in port operations using a case study of drone package delivery at Rotterdam Port. Beyond the technical challenges of drone technology as an upcoming technology, it needs to be clarified how drones can operate within a port ecosystem and how they could contribute to sustainable logistics. KRVE (boatmen association), supported by other stakeholders of Rotterdam port, approached our school to conduct exploratory research. Rotterdam Port is the busiest port in Europe in terms of container volume. Thirty thousand vessels enter the port yearly, all needing various services, including deliveries. Around 120 packages/day are delivered to ships/offices onshore using small boats, cars, or trucks. Deliveries can take hours, although the distance to the receiver is close via the air. Around 80% of the packages are up to 20kg, with a maximum of 50kg. Typical content includes documents, spare parts, and samples for chemical analysis. Delivery of packages using drones has advantages compared with traditional transport methods: 1. It can save time, which is critical to port operators and ship owners trying to reduce mooring costs. 2. It can increase logistic efficiency by streamlining operations. 3. It can reduce carbon emissions by limiting the use of diesel engines, boats, cars, and trucks. 4. It can reduce potential accidents involving people in dangerous environments. The research will highlight whether drones can create value (economic, environmental, social) for logistics in port operations. The research output links to key national logistic agenda topics such as a circular economy with the development of innovative logistic ecosystems, energy transition with the reduction of carbon emissions, societal earning potential where new technology can stimulate the economy, digitalization, key enabling technology for lean operations, and opportunities for innovative business models.
