Clinicians participating in the TW via VC performed as well as those in the FTF group on the competency test. Videoconferencing improves access to CE, is well received by participants, and provides a cost-effective method of course delivery. Further evaluation of other CE events delivered through VC is indicated.
IntroductionPhysical exercise after stroke is essential for improving recovery and general health, and reducing future stroke risk. However, people with stroke are not sufficiently active on return to the community after rehabilitation. We developed the Promoting Optimal Physical Exercise for Life (PROPEL) programme, which combines exercise with self-management strategies within rehabilitation to promote ongoing physical activity in the community after rehabilitation. This study aims to evaluate the effect of PROPEL on long-term participation in exercise after discharge from stroke rehabilitation. We hypothesise that individuals who complete PROPEL will be more likely to meet recommended frequency, duration and intensity of exercise compared with individuals who do not complete the programme up to 6 months post discharge from stroke rehabilitation.Methods and analysisIndividuals undergoing outpatient stroke rehabilitation at one of six hospitals will be recruited (target n=192 total). A stepped-wedge design will be employed; that is, the PROPEL intervention (group exercise plus self-management) will be ‘rolled out’ to each site at a random time within the study period. Prior to roll-out of the PROPEL intervention, sites will complete the control intervention (group aerobic exercise only). Participation in physical activity for 6 months post discharge will be measured via activity and heart rate monitors, and standardised physical activity questionnaire. Adherence to exercise guidelines will be evaluated by (1) number of ‘active minutes’ per week (from the activity monitor), (2) amount of time per week when heart rate is within a target range (ie, 55%–80% of age-predicted maximum) and (3) amount of time per week completing ‘moderate’ or ‘strenuous’ physical activities (from the questionnaire). We will compare the proportion of active and inactive individuals at 6 months post intervention using mixed-model logistic regression, with fixed effects of time and phase and random effect of cluster (site).Ethics and disseminationTo date, research ethics approval has been received from five of the six sites, with conditional approval granted by the sixth site. Results will be disseminated directly to study participants at the end of the trial, and to other stake holders via publication in a peer-reviewed journal.Trial registration numberNCT02951338; Pre-results.
doi: medRxiv preprint NOTE: This preprint reports new research that has not been certified by peer review and should not be used to guide clinical practice.
Purpose: Reactive balance training (RBT) aims to improve reactive balance control. However, because RBT involves clients losing balance, clinicians may view that it is unsafe or not feasible for some clients. We aimed to explore how clinicians are specifically implementing RBT to treat balance and mobility issues. Materials and methods: Physiotherapists and kinesiologists across Canada who reported that they include RBT in their practices were invited to complete telephone interviews about their experience with RBT. Interviews were transcribed verbatim, and analysed using a deductive thematic analysis. Results: Ten participants completed telephone interviews, which lasted between 30-60 minutes. Participants were primarily working in a hospital setting (inpatient rehabilitation (n=3); outpatient rehabilitation (n=2), and were treating those with neurological disorders (n=5). Four main themes were identified: 1) there is variability in RBT approaches; 2) knowledge can be a barrier and facilitator to RBT; 3) reactive balance control is viewed as an advanced skill; and 4) RBT experience builds confidence. Conclusions: Our findings suggest a need for resources to make clinical implementation of RBT more feasible.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.