Patricia Masterson-Algar1, Sion Williams1, Christopher R Burton1, Calum A Arthur2, Zoe Hoare3, Val Morrison4, Kate Radford5, Diane Seddon6, Salah Elghenzai7. 1. Bangor Institute for Health and Medical Research, School of Healthcare Sciences, Bangor University, Bangor, UK. 2. Faculty of Health Sport and Science, University of Stirling, Stirling, UK. 3. North Wales Organization for Randomized Trials in Health (NWORTH), Bangor University, Bangor, UK. 4. School of Psychology, Bangor University, Bangor, UK. 5. Queen's Medical Centre, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK. 6. School of Healthcare Sciences, Bangor University, Bangor, UK. 7. Ysbyty Gwynedd, Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board, Bangor, UK.
Abstract
Purpose: Rebuilding one's life after stroke is a key priority persistently identified by patients yet professionally led interventions have little impact. This co-design study constructs and tests a novel peer-led coaching intervention to improve post-stroke leisure and general social participation. Methods: This study followed the principles of co-design by actively engaging and harnessing the knowledge of stroke survivors in order to develop and test a peer-lead coaching intervention. Phase 1 assessed function, mood, and involvement in leisure and social activities 6 months following stroke (n = 79). Phase 2 involved semi-structured, in-depth interviews with 18 stroke survivors, and 10 family carers to explore experiences related to social and leisure participation. Phase 3 tested the co-designed peer-led coaching intervention. Data collected also included co-design feedback sessions and a training workshop with selected peer coaches and in addition, interviews with stroke survivors and their peer coaches at two time-points: following the training program (n = 5) and delivery of the intervention (n = 2). Results: A peer-coaching intervention was successfully co-designed and tested combining the use of lay knowledge sociocognitive and self-regulatory theories with principles of transformational leadership theory. Both peers and stroke survivors reported having benefited at a personal level.Conclusions: This study reports on an innovative community-based and peer-led intervention and its results have generated new evidence on how stroke survivors engage with and respond to peer coaching support. It further provides a theoretical platform for designing and implementing peer interventions. Hence, these results have the potential to inform the development of future peer coaching intervention not only for stroke rehabilitation but also for a wide range of chronic conditions.Implications for rehabilitationThe results of this co-design study, if replicated and extended, provide a theoretical framework to guide rehabilitation professionals about the optimal timing of peer-coaching interventions and contextual factors that need to be taken into account.Applying transformational leadership theory principles to the training of peers may prove useful at the time of the implementation of a coaching intervention.Peer-led coaching interventions, which are community-based and tailored to stroke survivors at the time of discharge, may help support re-engagement in social and leisure activities.
Purpose: Rebuilding one's life after stroke is a key priority persistently identified by patients yet professionally led interventions have little impact. This co-design study constructs and tests a novel peer-led coaching intervention to improve post-stroke leisure and general social participation. Methods: This study followed the principles of co-design by actively engaging and harnessing the knowledge of stroke survivors in order to develop and test a peer-lead coaching intervention. Phase 1 assessed function, mood, and involvement in leisure and social activities 6 months following stroke (n = 79). Phase 2 involved semi-structured, in-depth interviews with 18 stroke survivors, and 10 family carers to explore experiences related to social and leisure participation. Phase 3 tested the co-designed peer-led coaching intervention. Data collected also included co-design feedback sessions and a training workshop with selected peer coaches and in addition, interviews with stroke survivors and their peer coaches at two time-points: following the training program (n = 5) and delivery of the intervention (n = 2). Results: A peer-coaching intervention was successfully co-designed and tested combining the use of lay knowledge sociocognitive and self-regulatory theories with principles of transformational leadership theory. Both peers and stroke survivors reported having benefited at a personal level.Conclusions: This study reports on an innovative community-based and peer-led intervention and its results have generated new evidence on how stroke survivors engage with and respond to peer coaching support. It further provides a theoretical platform for designing and implementing peer interventions. Hence, these results have the potential to inform the development of future peer coaching intervention not only for stroke rehabilitation but also for a wide range of chronic conditions.Implications for rehabilitationThe results of this co-design study, if replicated and extended, provide a theoretical framework to guide rehabilitation professionals about the optimal timing of peer-coaching interventions and contextual factors that need to be taken into account.Applying transformational leadership theory principles to the training of peers may prove useful at the time of the implementation of a coaching intervention.Peer-led coaching interventions, which are community-based and tailored to stroke survivors at the time of discharge, may help support re-engagement in social and leisure activities.
Entities:
Keywords:
Stroke; co-design; community-based intervention; peer coaching; rehabilitation; social and leisure activities
Authors: Janet A Curran; Christine Cassidy; Andrea Bishop; Lori Wozney; Amy C Plint; Krista Ritchie; Sharon E Straus; Helen Wong; Amanda Newton; Mona Jabbour; Shannon MacPhee; Sydney Breneol; Emma Burns; Jill Chorney; Jennifer Lawton; Melanie Doyle; Rebecca MacKay; Roger Zemek; Tanya Penney; Jeremy Grimshaw Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2020-05-11 Impact factor: 2.692