Objective: To explore the experiences of stroke survivors and their carers of augmented arm rehabilitation including supported self-management in terms of its acceptability, appropriateness and relevance. Design: A qualitative design, nested within a larger, multi-centre randomized controlled feasibility trial that compared augmented arm rehabilitation starting at three or nine weeks after stroke, with usual care. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with participants in both augmented arm rehabilitation groups. Normalization Process Theory was used to inform the topic guide and map the findings. Framework analysis was applied. Setting: Interviews were conducted in stroke survivors’ homes, at Glasgow Caledonian University and in hospital. Participants: 17 stroke survivors and five carers were interviewed after completion of augmented arm rehabilitation. Intervention: Evidence-based augmented arm rehabilitation (27 additional hours over six weeks), including therapist-led sessions and supported self-management. Results: Three main themes were identified: (1) acceptability of the intervention (2) supported self-management and (3) coping with the intervention. All stroke survivors coped well with the intensity of the augmented arm rehabilitation programme. The majority of stroke survivors engaged in supported self-management and implemented activities into their daily routine. However, the findings suggest that some stroke survivors (male >70 years) had difficulties with self-management, needing a higher level of support. Conclusion: Augmented arm rehabilitation commencing within nine weeks post stroke was reported to be well tolerated. The findings suggested that supported self-management seemed acceptable and appropriate to those who saw the relevance of the rehabilitation activities for their daily lives, and embedded them into their daily routines.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

ObjectiveThis study explored what worked for whom, how and under what circumstances in a community-based augmented arm rehabilitation programme that was designed to enable stroke survivors to meet their personal rehabilitation needs.DesignA mixed methods realist-informed study of data from a randomised controlled feasibility trial, comparing augmented arm rehabilitation after stroke with usual care. The analysis was designed to develop initial programme theories and refine these through triangulation of qualitative and quantitative trial data. Participants with a confirmed stroke diagnosis and stroke-related arm impairment were recruited from five health boards in Scotland. Only data from participants in the augmented group were analysed. The augmented intervention comprised evidence-based arm rehabilitation (27 additional hours over 6 weeks) including self-managed practice, and focused on individual rehabilitation needs identified through the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM). The COPM indicated to which extent rehabilitation needs were met following the intervention, the Action Research Arm Test provided data on changes in arm function, and qualitative interviews provided information about the context and potential mechanisms of action.FindingsSeventeen stroke survivors (11 males, age range 40–84 years, NIHSS median (IQR) 6 (8)) were included. Median (IQR) COPM Performance and Satisfaction scores (min.1-max.10) improved from pre-intervention 2 (5) to post-intervention 5 (7). Findings suggested that meeting rehabilitation needs was facilitated by strengthening participants’ sense of intrinsic motivation (through grounding exercises in everyday activities linked to valued life roles, and enabling them to overcome barriers to self-managed practice), and via therapeutic relationships (through trust and expertise, shared decision-making, encouragement and emotional support). Collectively, these mechanisms enabled stroke survivors to build confidence and gain mastery experience necessary to engage in new self-managed practice routines.ConclusionThis realist-informed study enabled the development of initial programme theories to explain how and in what circumstances the augmented arm rehabilitation intervention may have enabled participants to meet their personal rehabilitation needs. Encouraging participants’ sense of intrinsic motivation and building therapeutic relationships appeared instrumental. These initial programme theories require further testing, refinement, and integration with the wider literature.