Factors affecting outcome in participation one year after stroke: A secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial

9Citations
Citations of this article
96Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objective: To explore the importance of client characteristics (age, sex, stroke severity and participation before stroke), rehabilitation context (in-patient or client's home) and approach (enhanced clientcenteredness or not) on participation in everyday life after stroke. Methods: A secondary analysis of data on 237 participants from a previous randomized controlled trial evaluating an enhanced client-centred intervention after stroke. Plausible associations between client characteristics, context and rehabilitation approach, and a positive outcome regarding participation were explored. Three different outcome measures for participation were used: Stroke Impact Scale 3.0, domain participation; Frenchay Activities Index; and Occupational Gaps Questionnaire. Results: For all participants there was a significant association between mild stroke and a positive outcome using the Frenchay Activities Index. Among participants who had not received the enhanced client-centred approach, there was a significant association between mild stroke and a positive outcome using the Stroke Impact Scale. The context of rehabilitation, i.e. receiving home rehabilitation, was also associated with a positive outcome in the Frenchay Activities Index for the control group. Conclusion: In order to increase participation in everyday life for people after stroke it appears to be important to use an enhanced client-centred approach, particularly when working within in-patient rehabilitation and with people with moderate or severe stroke.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Gustavsson, M., Guidetti, S., Eriksson, G., Von Koch, L., & Ytterberg, C. (2019). Factors affecting outcome in participation one year after stroke: A secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 51(3), 160–166. https://doi.org/10.2340/16501977-2523

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free