Stephanie L Silveira1,2, Tracey A Ledoux1, Craig A Johnston1, Claire Kalpakjian3, Daniel P O'Connor1, Michael Cottingham1, Ryan McGrath4, Denise Tate3. 1. Department of Health and Human Performance, University of Houston, Houston, Texas, USA. 2. Department of Physical Therapy, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama, USA. 3. Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA. 4. Department of Health, Nutrition, and Exercise Sciences, North Dakota State University, Fargo, North Dakota, USA.
Abstract
Objective/Background: To examine how demographic and injury characteristics identify satisfaction with life (SWL), and assess the differential effects of a wellness intervention by baseline SWL groups.Design: Baseline and longitudinal analysis of a randomized controlled pilot intervention using decision tree regression and linear mixed models.Setting: Community based.Participants: Seventy-two individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI) were randomized to an intervention group (n = 39) or control group (n = 33). Participants were aged 44.1 ± 13.0 years and 13.1 ± 10.6 years post-injury. Most participants were male (n = 50; 69.4%) and had paraplegia (n = 38; 52.7%). Participants were classified as high versus low SWL at baseline using a cutoff score of 20.Interventions: The intervention aimed to increase self-efficacy, and in turn, increase engagement in health-promoting behaviors related to SWL. Six 4-hour in-person workshops were conducted over a 3-month period led by experts and peer-mentors who were available for support.Outcome measure(s): Self-efficacy for health practices, secondary condition severity, health-promoting behaviors, perceived stress, and SWL. Results: At baseline, participants with low SWL were recently injured (<4.5 years), while persons with high SWL were married and younger (<49 years old). Intervention participants with low SWL at baseline significantly improved SWL over time compared to those with high SWL (P = 0.02). Conclusion: Certain injury and demographic characteristics were associated with SWL, and intervention participants with low SWL at baseline improved their SWL over 2 years. Healthcare providers should consider time post-injury, marital status, and age in identifying individuals at risk for low SWL that may benefit from wellness interventions.
RCT Entities:
Objective/Background: To examine how demographic and injury characteristics identify satisfaction with life (SWL), and assess the differential effects of a wellness intervention by baseline SWL groups.Design: Baseline and longitudinal analysis of a randomized controlled pilot intervention using decision tree regression and linear mixed models.Setting: Community based.Participants: Seventy-two individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI) were randomized to an intervention group (n = 39) or control group (n = 33). Participants were aged 44.1 ± 13.0 years and 13.1 ± 10.6 years post-injury. Most participants were male (n = 50; 69.4%) and had paraplegia (n = 38; 52.7%). Participants were classified as high versus low SWL at baseline using a cutoff score of 20.Interventions: The intervention aimed to increase self-efficacy, and in turn, increase engagement in health-promoting behaviors related to SWL. Six 4-hour in-person workshops were conducted over a 3-month period led by experts and peer-mentors who were available for support.Outcome measure(s): Self-efficacy for health practices, secondary condition severity, health-promoting behaviors, perceived stress, and SWL. Results: At baseline, participants with low SWL were recently injured (<4.5 years), while persons with high SWL were married and younger (<49 years old). Intervention participants with low SWL at baseline significantly improved SWL over time compared to those with high SWL (P = 0.02). Conclusion: Certain injury and demographic characteristics were associated with SWL, and intervention participants with low SWL at baseline improved their SWL over 2 years. Healthcare providers should consider time post-injury, marital status, and age in identifying individuals at risk for low SWL that may benefit from wellness interventions.
Authors: Christel M van Leeuwen; Marcel W Post; Trynke Hoekstra; Lucas H van der Woude; Sonja de Groot; Govert J Snoek; Dineke G Mulder; Eline Lindeman Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2011-02 Impact factor: 3.966
Authors: Claire Z Kalpakjian; Bethlyn Houlihan; Michelle A Meade; Dunia Karana-Zebari; Allen W Heinemann; Marcel P Dijkers; Jane Wierbicky; Susan Charlifue Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2011-01-31 Impact factor: 3.966
Authors: Eric D Zemper; Denise G Tate; Sunny Roller; Martin Forchheimer; Anthony Chiodo; Virginia S Nelson; William Scelza Journal: Am J Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2003-12 Impact factor: 2.159
Authors: Brad E Dicianno; John Lovelace; Pamela Peele; Christopher Fassinger; Patricia Houck; Alexandra Bursic; Michael L Boninger Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2016-06-14 Impact factor: 3.966