PURPOSE: Although acute stroke care has improved survival, many individuals report dissatisfaction with community reintegration after stroke. The aim of this qualitative meta-synthesis was to examine the barriers and facilitators of community reintegration in the first year after stroke from the perspective of people with stroke. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted. Papers that used qualitative methods to explore the experiences of individuals with stroke around community reintegration in the first year after stroke were included. Two reviewers independently assessed the methodological quality of papers. Themes, concepts and interpretations were extracted from each study, compared and meta-synthesised. RESULTS: From the 18 included qualitative studies four themes related to community reintegration in the first year after stroke were identified: (i) the primary effects of stroke, (ii) personal factors, (iii) social factors and (iv) relationships with professionals. CONCLUSIONS: This review suggests that an individual's perseverance, adaptability and ability to overcome emotional challenges can facilitate reintegration into the community despite persisting effects of their stroke. Appropriate support from family, friends, the broader community and healthcare professionals is important. Therapeutic activities should relate to meaningful activities and should be tailored to the individual stroke survivor. IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATION: Stroke survivors feel that rehabilitation in familiar environments and therapeutic activities that reflect real-life could help their community re-integration. In addition to the physical sequelae of stroke, emotional consequences of stroke should be addressed during rehabilitation. Healthcare professionals can provide clear and locally relevant advice to facilitate aspects of community reintegration, including the return to driving and work.
PURPOSE: Although acute stroke care has improved survival, many individuals report dissatisfaction with community reintegration after stroke. The aim of this qualitative meta-synthesis was to examine the barriers and facilitators of community reintegration in the first year after stroke from the perspective of people with stroke. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted. Papers that used qualitative methods to explore the experiences of individuals with stroke around community reintegration in the first year after stroke were included. Two reviewers independently assessed the methodological quality of papers. Themes, concepts and interpretations were extracted from each study, compared and meta-synthesised. RESULTS: From the 18 included qualitative studies four themes related to community reintegration in the first year after stroke were identified: (i) the primary effects of stroke, (ii) personal factors, (iii) social factors and (iv) relationships with professionals. CONCLUSIONS: This review suggests that an individual's perseverance, adaptability and ability to overcome emotional challenges can facilitate reintegration into the community despite persisting effects of their stroke. Appropriate support from family, friends, the broader community and healthcare professionals is important. Therapeutic activities should relate to meaningful activities and should be tailored to the individual stroke survivor. IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATION: Stroke survivors feel that rehabilitation in familiar environments and therapeutic activities that reflect real-life could help their community re-integration. In addition to the physical sequelae of stroke, emotional consequences of stroke should be addressed during rehabilitation. Healthcare professionals can provide clear and locally relevant advice to facilitate aspects of community reintegration, including the return to driving and work.
Entities:
Keywords:
Barriers; community reintegration; facilitators; qualitative; rehabilitation; stroke
Authors: Suzanne Perea Burns; Brandi M White; Gayenell Magwood; Charles Ellis; Ayaba Logan; Joy N Jones Buie; Robert J Adams Journal: Disabil Rehabil Date: 2018-03-23 Impact factor: 3.033
Authors: Anson B Rosenfeldt; Susan M Linder; Sara Davidson; Cynthia Clark; Nicole M Zimmerman; John J Lee; Jay L Alberts Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2018-12-10 Impact factor: 3.966
Authors: Janita Pak Chun Chau; Suzanne Hoi Shan Lo; Alexander Yuk Lun Lau; Vivian Wing Yan Lee; Kai Chow Choi; Eddie Chi Fai Kwok; David R Thompson Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-07-05 Impact factor: 3.006
Authors: Anna L Kratz; Dawn M Ehde; Marisol A Hanley; Mark P Jensen; Travis L Osborne; George H Kraft Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2015-10-31 Impact factor: 3.966
Authors: Aileen Barrett; Rose Galvin; Yvonne Steinert; Albert Scherpbier; Ann O'Shaughnessy; Mary Horgan; Tanya Horsley Journal: Syst Rev Date: 2015-05-08
Authors: Anna Norlander; Emma Carlstedt; Ann-Cathrin Jönsson; Eva M Lexell; Agneta Ståhl; Arne Lindgren; Susanne Iwarsson Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-02-22 Impact factor: 3.240