ObjectiveThe aim was to study a client-centred activities of daily living (ADL) intervention (CADL) compared with the usual ADL intervention (UADL) in people with stroke regarding: independence in ADL, perceived participation, life satisfaction, use of home-help service, and satisfaction with training and, in their significant others, regarding: caregiver burden, life satisfaction, and informal care.MethodsIn this multicentre study, 16 rehabilitation units were randomly assigned to deliver CADL or UADL. The occupational therapists who provided the CADL were specifically trained. Eligible for inclusion were people with stroke treated in a stroke unit ≤3 months after stroke, dependent in ≥two ADL, not diagnosed with dementia, and able to understand instructions. Data were collected at inclusion and three months thereafter. To detect a significant difference between the groups in the Stroke Impact Scale (SIS) domain “participation”, 280 participants were required. Intention-to-treat analysis was applied.ResultsAt three months, there was no difference in the outcomes between the CADL group (n = 129) and the UADL group (n = 151), or their significant others (n = 87/n = 93) except in the SIS domain “emotion” in favour of CADL (p = 0.04).ConclusionThe CADL does not appear to bring about short-term differences in outcomes and longer follow-ups are required.

Objective:The aim of the present study was to compare client-centeredness as it was documented by the occupational therapists in the units randomized to the intervention clusters with documentation by occupational therapists in the control clusters.Design:Comparison of medical records.Setting:The study is conducted in a context of a randomized controlled trial in Sweden, with 16 post-stroke rehabilitation units cluster randomized to intervention or control group.Subjects:Occupational therapist documentation in medical records of 279 clients with stroke.Main measures:The medical records were reviewed for their level of client-centeredness using a protocol developed from the Stewart et al model. The occupational therapists in the intervention groups participated in a workshop training to enhance their client-centeredness.Results:Occupational therapists with training in client-centeredness documented significantly more on goal setting (OR = 4.1; 95% CI, 1.87-8.81), on client participation in goal setting (OR=11.34; 95% CI, 5.97-21.57), on how the goals could be reached (OR=2.8; 95% CI, 1.7-4.62), on client participation in how goals could be reached (OR=4.56; 95% CI, 2.73-7.64), on the follow-up on goals (OR=5.77; 95% CI, 2.78-11-98) and on client participation in follow-up on goals (OR=7.44, 95% CI, 4.33-12.8). This association remained after adjustment for healthcare setting, client socio-demographic variables, and stroke severity.Conclusion:Documentation of goal setting and client participation in goal setting can be influenced by training.

Enablement is important also for the significant others of people with stroke. One way of enabling significant others to maintain an active lifestyle and find respite in everyday life might be to enable people with stroke to formulate and act upon their desired activity goals.

A goal for rehabilitation after stroke is to regain the ability to manage activities of daily living (ADL). The Swedish health care legislation recognizes that individuals bring unique sets of needs and preferences to encounters with the health care system, which should impact the services delivered. Consequently rehabilitation needs to be designed to meet each individual’s concern i.e., be client-centered. This implies interventions tailored to the client’s ability and perceived needs, services that take the client’s unique life-world experiences as the point of departure for goals and collaboration during the rehabilitation. However, studies on such services are scarce. Thus the aim was to compare a client-centered ADL intervention (CADL) to usual ADL training (UADL) regarding perceived participation, independence in ADL and life satisfaction at 3 months after inclusion. Methods: Sixteen rehabilitation units in Stockholm, Uppsala and Gävleborg, Sweden were randomly assigned to deliver either CADL or UADL to people in need of ADL rehabilitation after stroke. The occupational therapists (OT) who delivered the CADL were specifically trained. At 3 months perceived participation was assessed with the Stroke impact scale (SIS) and the Occupational Gaps questionnaire (OGQ), self-reported dependence in ADL with the Barthel Index (BI) and the Katz Extended ADL Index (KE), and life satisfaction with the LiSat-11. Number of contacts with an OT was collected in the clients’ medical records. Intention-to-treat analysis was applied. The significance level was set to 0.05. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01417585 . Results: Two hundred and eighty persons with stroke were included (CADL n=126, UADL n=154). The mean number of OT sessions in the CADL was 19 and 14 in the UADL group. There were no differences regarding SIS (p=0.64), OGQ (p=0.15), BI (p=0.06), KE (p=0.78) or in LiSat-11 (p=0.77). Conclusion: Albeit people with stroke who receive CADL tend to be more independent in ADL at 3 months it is likely that differences in perceived participation and life satisfaction will not be present until later. Thus there is a need to evaluate such services in the long term, their impact on significant others and qualitative studies of the clients’ experiences.