Process evaluation of the Restore4stroke Self-Management intervention ‘Plan Ahead!’: a stroke-specific self-management intervention
Objective: To investigate whether the self-management intervention was implemented as intended. Additionally, we studied involvement in and satisfaction with the intervention among patients, their partners and therapists. Design: Mixed method, prospective study. Setting: Outpatient facilities of hos...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Clinical rehabilitation 2016-12, Vol.30 (12), p.1175-1185 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 1185 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 12 |
| container_start_page | 1175 |
| container_title | Clinical rehabilitation |
| container_volume | 30 |
| creator | Tielemans, Nienke S Schepers, Vera PM Visser-Meily, Johanna MA van Haastregt, Jolanda CM van Veen, Wendy JM van Stralen, Haike E van Heugten, Caroline M |
| description | Objective:
To investigate whether the self-management intervention was implemented as intended. Additionally, we studied involvement in and satisfaction with the intervention among patients, their partners and therapists.
Design:
Mixed method, prospective study.
Setting:
Outpatient facilities of hospitals/rehabilitation centres.
Participants:
Stroke patients, their partners and therapists from the experimental arm of the Restore4Stroke Self-Management study.
Intervention:
‘Plan Ahead!’ is a 10-week self-management intervention for stroke patients and partners, consisting of seven two-hour group sessions. Proactive action planning, education and peer support are main elements of this intervention.
Main measures:
Session logs, questionnaires for therapists, patients and their partners, and focus groups.
Data analysis:
Qualitative data were analysed with thematic analysis supplemented by quasi-statistics. Quantitative data were reported as descriptive statistics.
Results:
The study sample consisted of 53 patients and 26 partners taking part in the intervention, and all therapists delivering the intervention (N = 19). At least three-quarters of the intervention sessions were attended by 33 patients and 24 partners. On a scale from 1 to 10, patients, partners and therapists rated the intervention with mean scores of 7.5 (SD1.6), 7.8 (SD.7) and 7.4 (SD.7), respectively. Peer support was the most frequently appreciated element for participants and therapists. The proactive action planning tool was adequately applied in 76 of the 96 sessions.
Conclusion:
Although the target audience was reached and both participants and therapists were satisfied with the intervention, the proactive action planning tool that distinguishes the current intervention from existing stroke-specific self-management interventions was only partly implemented according to protocol. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1177/0269215515620255 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_5131629</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_0269215515620255</sage_id><sourcerecordid>1872651025</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c462t-9da03873d50f435e08a2bb8bc3c3159b1bd420cedde02e98ea92673d0d48083d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kUtP3DAUhS1EBcPQfVfIqJtu0voROw4LJIT6kqYq6mNtOfYNE0jiwU5G6o4df6H9e_ySOhqKKIKVLd3vHPvcg9ArSt5SWhTvCJMlo0JQIRlhQmyhGc2LIiOq4NtoNo2zab6L9mK8IIQoltMdtMukFIpzNkM3Z8FbiBHD2rSjGRrfY1_jYQn4G8TBB8jjEPwl4O_Q1tkX05tz6KAfcNMPENbpNklur3-ftabHJ0sw7vD2-s8RNngjzOIKbFM3FsfJoXvaYR-9qE0b4eXdOUc_P7z_cfopW3z9-Pn0ZJHZXLIhK50hPIVzgtQ5F0CUYVWlKsstp6KsaOVyRiw4B4RBqcCUTCacuFwRxR2fo-ON72qsOnA2vR5Mq1eh6Uz4pb1p9P-Tvlnqc7_WgnIqWZkM3twZBH81phXprokW2pQe_Bg1VWm5eSkFS-jrR-iFH0Of4iWqYFLQ1FmiyIaywccYoL7_DCV6alk_bjlJDh6GuBf8qzUB2QaIadcPXn3O8C_cI7Os</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1872651025</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Process evaluation of the Restore4stroke Self-Management intervention ‘Plan Ahead!’: a stroke-specific self-management intervention</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SAGE Complete</source><source>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><creator>Tielemans, Nienke S ; Schepers, Vera PM ; Visser-Meily, Johanna MA ; van Haastregt, Jolanda CM ; van Veen, Wendy JM ; van Stralen, Haike E ; van Heugten, Caroline M</creator><creatorcontrib>Tielemans, Nienke S ; Schepers, Vera PM ; Visser-Meily, Johanna MA ; van Haastregt, Jolanda CM ; van Veen, Wendy JM ; van Stralen, Haike E ; van Heugten, Caroline M</creatorcontrib><description>Objective:
To investigate whether the self-management intervention was implemented as intended. Additionally, we studied involvement in and satisfaction with the intervention among patients, their partners and therapists.
Design:
Mixed method, prospective study.
Setting:
Outpatient facilities of hospitals/rehabilitation centres.
Participants:
Stroke patients, their partners and therapists from the experimental arm of the Restore4Stroke Self-Management study.
Intervention:
‘Plan Ahead!’ is a 10-week self-management intervention for stroke patients and partners, consisting of seven two-hour group sessions. Proactive action planning, education and peer support are main elements of this intervention.
Main measures:
Session logs, questionnaires for therapists, patients and their partners, and focus groups.
Data analysis:
Qualitative data were analysed with thematic analysis supplemented by quasi-statistics. Quantitative data were reported as descriptive statistics.
Results:
The study sample consisted of 53 patients and 26 partners taking part in the intervention, and all therapists delivering the intervention (N = 19). At least three-quarters of the intervention sessions were attended by 33 patients and 24 partners. On a scale from 1 to 10, patients, partners and therapists rated the intervention with mean scores of 7.5 (SD1.6), 7.8 (SD.7) and 7.4 (SD.7), respectively. Peer support was the most frequently appreciated element for participants and therapists. The proactive action planning tool was adequately applied in 76 of the 96 sessions.
Conclusion:
Although the target audience was reached and both participants and therapists were satisfied with the intervention, the proactive action planning tool that distinguishes the current intervention from existing stroke-specific self-management interventions was only partly implemented according to protocol.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0269-2155</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1477-0873</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/0269215515620255</identifier><identifier>PMID: 26658332</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London, England: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Action planning ; Activities of daily living ; Adult ; Aged ; Caregivers ; Data ; Evaluation ; Evaluative Studies ; Female ; Hospitals ; Humans ; Intervention ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Mixed methods research ; Patient Care Planning ; Patient Education as Topic ; Patient Satisfaction ; Peer tutoring ; Planning ; Process Assessment (Health Care) ; Prospective Studies ; Questionnaires ; Rehabilitation ; Self Care ; Selfmanagement ; Social Support ; Stroke ; Stroke - therapy ; Therapists</subject><ispartof>Clinical rehabilitation, 2016-12, Vol.30 (12), p.1175-1185</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2015</rights><rights>The Author(s) 2015.</rights><rights>The Author(s) 2015 2015 SAGE Publications</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c462t-9da03873d50f435e08a2bb8bc3c3159b1bd420cedde02e98ea92673d0d48083d3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c462t-9da03873d50f435e08a2bb8bc3c3159b1bd420cedde02e98ea92673d0d48083d3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0269215515620255$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0269215515620255$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885,21819,27924,27925,30999,43621,43622</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26658332$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Tielemans, Nienke S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schepers, Vera PM</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Visser-Meily, Johanna MA</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Haastregt, Jolanda CM</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Veen, Wendy JM</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Stralen, Haike E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Heugten, Caroline M</creatorcontrib><title>Process evaluation of the Restore4stroke Self-Management intervention ‘Plan Ahead!’: a stroke-specific self-management intervention</title><title>Clinical rehabilitation</title><addtitle>Clin Rehabil</addtitle><description>Objective:
To investigate whether the self-management intervention was implemented as intended. Additionally, we studied involvement in and satisfaction with the intervention among patients, their partners and therapists.
Design:
Mixed method, prospective study.
Setting:
Outpatient facilities of hospitals/rehabilitation centres.
Participants:
Stroke patients, their partners and therapists from the experimental arm of the Restore4Stroke Self-Management study.
Intervention:
‘Plan Ahead!’ is a 10-week self-management intervention for stroke patients and partners, consisting of seven two-hour group sessions. Proactive action planning, education and peer support are main elements of this intervention.
Main measures:
Session logs, questionnaires for therapists, patients and their partners, and focus groups.
Data analysis:
Qualitative data were analysed with thematic analysis supplemented by quasi-statistics. Quantitative data were reported as descriptive statistics.
Results:
The study sample consisted of 53 patients and 26 partners taking part in the intervention, and all therapists delivering the intervention (N = 19). At least three-quarters of the intervention sessions were attended by 33 patients and 24 partners. On a scale from 1 to 10, patients, partners and therapists rated the intervention with mean scores of 7.5 (SD1.6), 7.8 (SD.7) and 7.4 (SD.7), respectively. Peer support was the most frequently appreciated element for participants and therapists. The proactive action planning tool was adequately applied in 76 of the 96 sessions.
Conclusion:
Although the target audience was reached and both participants and therapists were satisfied with the intervention, the proactive action planning tool that distinguishes the current intervention from existing stroke-specific self-management interventions was only partly implemented according to protocol.</description><subject>Action planning</subject><subject>Activities of daily living</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Caregivers</subject><subject>Data</subject><subject>Evaluation</subject><subject>Evaluative Studies</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Hospitals</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Intervention</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Mixed methods research</subject><subject>Patient Care Planning</subject><subject>Patient Education as Topic</subject><subject>Patient Satisfaction</subject><subject>Peer tutoring</subject><subject>Planning</subject><subject>Process Assessment (Health Care)</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Questionnaires</subject><subject>Rehabilitation</subject><subject>Self Care</subject><subject>Selfmanagement</subject><subject>Social Support</subject><subject>Stroke</subject><subject>Stroke - therapy</subject><subject>Therapists</subject><issn>0269-2155</issn><issn>1477-0873</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>AFRWT</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kUtP3DAUhS1EBcPQfVfIqJtu0voROw4LJIT6kqYq6mNtOfYNE0jiwU5G6o4df6H9e_ySOhqKKIKVLd3vHPvcg9ArSt5SWhTvCJMlo0JQIRlhQmyhGc2LIiOq4NtoNo2zab6L9mK8IIQoltMdtMukFIpzNkM3Z8FbiBHD2rSjGRrfY1_jYQn4G8TBB8jjEPwl4O_Q1tkX05tz6KAfcNMPENbpNklur3-ftabHJ0sw7vD2-s8RNngjzOIKbFM3FsfJoXvaYR-9qE0b4eXdOUc_P7z_cfopW3z9-Pn0ZJHZXLIhK50hPIVzgtQ5F0CUYVWlKsstp6KsaOVyRiw4B4RBqcCUTCacuFwRxR2fo-ON72qsOnA2vR5Mq1eh6Uz4pb1p9P-Tvlnqc7_WgnIqWZkM3twZBH81phXprokW2pQe_Bg1VWm5eSkFS-jrR-iFH0Of4iWqYFLQ1FmiyIaywccYoL7_DCV6alk_bjlJDh6GuBf8qzUB2QaIadcPXn3O8C_cI7Os</recordid><startdate>20161201</startdate><enddate>20161201</enddate><creator>Tielemans, Nienke S</creator><creator>Schepers, Vera PM</creator><creator>Visser-Meily, Johanna MA</creator><creator>van Haastregt, Jolanda CM</creator><creator>van Veen, Wendy JM</creator><creator>van Stralen, Haike E</creator><creator>van Heugten, Caroline M</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>Sage Publications Ltd</general><scope>AFRWT</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QJ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20161201</creationdate><title>Process evaluation of the Restore4stroke Self-Management intervention ‘Plan Ahead!’: a stroke-specific self-management intervention</title><author>Tielemans, Nienke S ; Schepers, Vera PM ; Visser-Meily, Johanna MA ; van Haastregt, Jolanda CM ; van Veen, Wendy JM ; van Stralen, Haike E ; van Heugten, Caroline M</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c462t-9da03873d50f435e08a2bb8bc3c3159b1bd420cedde02e98ea92673d0d48083d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Action planning</topic><topic>Activities of daily living</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Caregivers</topic><topic>Data</topic><topic>Evaluation</topic><topic>Evaluative Studies</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Hospitals</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Intervention</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Mixed methods research</topic><topic>Patient Care Planning</topic><topic>Patient Education as Topic</topic><topic>Patient Satisfaction</topic><topic>Peer tutoring</topic><topic>Planning</topic><topic>Process Assessment (Health Care)</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Questionnaires</topic><topic>Rehabilitation</topic><topic>Self Care</topic><topic>Selfmanagement</topic><topic>Social Support</topic><topic>Stroke</topic><topic>Stroke - therapy</topic><topic>Therapists</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Tielemans, Nienke S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schepers, Vera PM</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Visser-Meily, Johanna MA</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Haastregt, Jolanda CM</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Veen, Wendy JM</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Stralen, Haike E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Heugten, Caroline M</creatorcontrib><collection>Sage Journals GOLD Open Access 2024</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Clinical rehabilitation</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Tielemans, Nienke S</au><au>Schepers, Vera PM</au><au>Visser-Meily, Johanna MA</au><au>van Haastregt, Jolanda CM</au><au>van Veen, Wendy JM</au><au>van Stralen, Haike E</au><au>van Heugten, Caroline M</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Process evaluation of the Restore4stroke Self-Management intervention ‘Plan Ahead!’: a stroke-specific self-management intervention</atitle><jtitle>Clinical rehabilitation</jtitle><addtitle>Clin Rehabil</addtitle><date>2016-12-01</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>30</volume><issue>12</issue><spage>1175</spage><epage>1185</epage><pages>1175-1185</pages><issn>0269-2155</issn><eissn>1477-0873</eissn><abstract>Objective:
To investigate whether the self-management intervention was implemented as intended. Additionally, we studied involvement in and satisfaction with the intervention among patients, their partners and therapists.
Design:
Mixed method, prospective study.
Setting:
Outpatient facilities of hospitals/rehabilitation centres.
Participants:
Stroke patients, their partners and therapists from the experimental arm of the Restore4Stroke Self-Management study.
Intervention:
‘Plan Ahead!’ is a 10-week self-management intervention for stroke patients and partners, consisting of seven two-hour group sessions. Proactive action planning, education and peer support are main elements of this intervention.
Main measures:
Session logs, questionnaires for therapists, patients and their partners, and focus groups.
Data analysis:
Qualitative data were analysed with thematic analysis supplemented by quasi-statistics. Quantitative data were reported as descriptive statistics.
Results:
The study sample consisted of 53 patients and 26 partners taking part in the intervention, and all therapists delivering the intervention (N = 19). At least three-quarters of the intervention sessions were attended by 33 patients and 24 partners. On a scale from 1 to 10, patients, partners and therapists rated the intervention with mean scores of 7.5 (SD1.6), 7.8 (SD.7) and 7.4 (SD.7), respectively. Peer support was the most frequently appreciated element for participants and therapists. The proactive action planning tool was adequately applied in 76 of the 96 sessions.
Conclusion:
Although the target audience was reached and both participants and therapists were satisfied with the intervention, the proactive action planning tool that distinguishes the current intervention from existing stroke-specific self-management interventions was only partly implemented according to protocol.</abstract><cop>London, England</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><pmid>26658332</pmid><doi>10.1177/0269215515620255</doi><tpages>11</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0269-2155 |
| ispartof | Clinical rehabilitation, 2016-12, Vol.30 (12), p.1175-1185 |
| issn | 0269-2155 1477-0873 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_5131629 |
| source | MEDLINE; SAGE Complete; Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA) |
| subjects | Action planning Activities of daily living Adult Aged Caregivers Data Evaluation Evaluative Studies Female Hospitals Humans Intervention Male Middle Aged Mixed methods research Patient Care Planning Patient Education as Topic Patient Satisfaction Peer tutoring Planning Process Assessment (Health Care) Prospective Studies Questionnaires Rehabilitation Self Care Selfmanagement Social Support Stroke Stroke - therapy Therapists |
| title | Process evaluation of the Restore4stroke Self-Management intervention ‘Plan Ahead!’: a stroke-specific self-management intervention |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-07T06%3A49%3A25IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Process%20evaluation%20of%20the%20Restore4stroke%20Self-Management%20intervention%20%E2%80%98Plan%20Ahead!%E2%80%99:%20a%20stroke-specific%20self-management%20intervention&rft.jtitle=Clinical%20rehabilitation&rft.au=Tielemans,%20Nienke%20S&rft.date=2016-12-01&rft.volume=30&rft.issue=12&rft.spage=1175&rft.epage=1185&rft.pages=1175-1185&rft.issn=0269-2155&rft.eissn=1477-0873&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/0269215515620255&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E1872651025%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1872651025&rft_id=info:pmid/26658332&rft_sage_id=10.1177_0269215515620255&rfr_iscdi=true |