| Title |
Do empowered stroke patients perform better at self-management and functional recovery after a stroke? A randomized controlled trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Interventions in Aging, October 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/cia.s109560 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Janet WH Sit, Sek Ying Chair, Kai Chow Choi, Carmen WH Chan, Diana TF Lee, Aileen WK Chan, Jo LK Cheung, Siu Wai Tang, Po Shan Chan, Ruth E Taylor-Piliae |
| Abstract |
Self-management after a stroke is a challenge because of multifaceted care needs and complex disabling consequences that cause further hindrance to patient participation. A 13-week stroke patient empowerment intervention (Health Empowerment Intervention for Stroke Self-management [HEISS]) was developed to enhance patients' ability to participate in self-management. To examine the effects of the empowerment intervention on stroke patients' self-efficacy, self-management behavior, and functional recovery. This is a single-blind randomized controlled trial with stroke survivors assigned to either a control group (CG) receiving usual ambulatory rehabilitation care or the HEISS in addition to usual care (intervention group [IG]). Outcome data were collected at baseline (T0), 1 week (T1), 3 months (T2), and 6 months (T3) postintervention. Data were analyzed on the intention-to-treat principle. The generalized estimating equation model was used to assess the differential change of self-efficacy in illness management, self-management behaviors (cognitive symptom management, communication with physician, medication adherence, and self-blood pressure monitoring), and functional recovery (Barthel and Lawton indices) across time points (baseline = T0, 1 week = T1, 3 months = T2, and 6 months = T3 postintervention) between the two groups. A total of 210 (CG =105, IG =105) Hong Kong Chinese stroke survivors (mean age =69 years, 49% women, 72% ischemic stroke, 89% hemiparesis, and 63% tactile sensory deficit) were enrolled in the study. Those in IG reported better self-efficacy in illness management 3-month (P=0.011) and 6-month (P=0.012) postintervention, along with better self-management behaviors at all follow-up time points (all P<0.05), apart from medication adherence (P>0.05). Those in IG had significantly better functional recovery (Barthel, all P<0.05; Lawton, all P<0.001), compared to CG. The overall dropout rate was 16.7%. Patient empowerment intervention (HEISS) may influence self-efficacy in illness management and improve self-management behavior and functional recovery of stroke survivors. Furthermore, the HEISS can be conducted in parallel with existing ambulatory stroke rehabilitation services and provide added value in sustaining stroke self-management and functional improvement in the long term. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Hong Kong | 1 | 25% |
| Spain | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 279 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 278 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 43 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 37 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 17 | 6% |
| Other | 16 | 6% |
| Researcher | 13 | 5% |
| Other | 53 | 19% |
| Unknown | 100 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 78 | 28% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 46 | 16% |
| Psychology | 13 | 5% |
| Neuroscience | 13 | 5% |
| Sports and Recreations | 5 | 2% |
| Other | 25 | 9% |
| Unknown | 99 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 March 2019.
All research outputs
#6,557,965
of 25,576,275 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#616
of 1,973 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#93,314
of 333,154 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#18
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,576,275 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,973 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 333,154 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.