Jarvis Kathryn A, Edelstyn Nicola Mj, Hunter Susan M
University of Central Lancashire (UCLan), Preston, UK.
Department of Psychology, Keele University, Newcastle-under-Lyme, UK.
Br J Occup Ther. 2024 Nov;87(11):693-703. doi: 10.1177/03080226241261183. Epub 2024 Jul 26.
Constraint-induced movement therapy has been shown to be effective in a sub-group of sub-acute stroke survivors but has not been widely implemented in the United Kingdom. This study explored therapist and stroke survivor perceptions and experiences of constraint-induced movement therapy and explored the non-agreement (incongruence) and agreement (congruence) of these perspectives.
Consenting occupational therapists ( = 3) and physiotherapist ( = 5) participated in a focus group discussion. Four-stroke survivors undertook pre- and post-constraint-induced movement therapy interviews. Stroke survivor participants selected and undertook an evidence-based constraint-induced movement therapy protocol. Focus groups and interview audio recordings were independently analysed thematically. Therapist and stroke survivor views were subsequently synthesised using meta-ethnographic principles.
Four over-arching themes were identified: motivation and determination to participate in constraint-induced movement therapy; who benefits; which protocol; making constraint-induced movement therapy feasible. The final over-arching theme comprised five sub-themes: fatigue and sleep; pain; transport; need for support; training, support and mentorship for therapists. Stroke survivors and therapists held contrasting views on three themes.
Participating stroke survivors successfully undertook a self-selected, evidence-based constraint-induced movement therapy protocol. The identified enablers and barriers should inform future constraint-induced movement therapy protocol development. The contrasting views held by therapists and stroke survivors reinforce the need for collaborative communication and opportunity for choice during constraint-induced movement therapy.
强制性运动疗法已被证明对亚急性中风幸存者的一个亚组有效,但在英国尚未得到广泛应用。本研究探讨了治疗师和中风幸存者对强制性运动疗法的看法和体验,并探讨了这些观点的不一致(不相符)和一致(相符)情况。
同意参与的职业治疗师(3名)和物理治疗师(5名)参加了焦点小组讨论。四名中风幸存者在强制性运动疗法前后接受了访谈。中风幸存者参与者选择并实施了基于证据的强制性运动疗法方案。对焦点小组和访谈录音进行了独立的主题分析。随后,运用元民族志原则综合了治疗师和中风幸存者的观点。
确定了四个总体主题:参与强制性运动疗法的动机和决心;谁能受益;采用哪种方案;使强制性运动疗法可行。最后一个总体主题包括五个子主题:疲劳与睡眠;疼痛;交通;支持需求;治疗师的培训、支持和指导。中风幸存者和治疗师在三个主题上持有不同观点。
参与研究的中风幸存者成功实施了自行选择的、基于证据的强制性运动疗法方案。所确定的促进因素和障碍应为未来强制性运动疗法方案的制定提供参考。治疗师和中风幸存者的不同观点强化了在强制性运动疗法期间进行协作沟通和提供选择机会的必要性。