Promoting psychosocial wellbeing following stroke A randomized, single blind, controlled trial Line Kildal Bragstad, OT, PhD, Postdoc, Oslo University Hospital Ellen Gabrielsen Hjelle, OT, PhD Candidate, University of Oslo 1st CHARM International Seminar, Oslo November 10th 2015 Presentation outline • Background • Development of study and intervention • The intervention – Presentation of worksheets • Methods – RCT design – Evaluation • Status and experiences after 1 year of recruitment Psychosocial problems following stroke • Prevalent symptoms: – Depression – Anxiety – Emotional instability – Social isolation – Aphasia (Hackett et. al. 2008a,b; Campbell Burton et. al. 2013; Ferro et. al. 2009; Barker-Collo 2009; Kouwenhoven et. al. 2011; Engelter et. al. 2006) Colourbox.com Psychosocial problems following stroke • Impact on: – functional level – quality of life – survival • Common challenges: – give up leisure activities – have difficulties returning to work (Hackett et. al. 2008a,b; Redfern et al. 2006; Teoh et. al. 2009; Northcott & Hilari 2011; Martinsen et. al. 2013 ; Ferro et. al. 2009; Kouwenhoven et. al. 2011) Existing interventions • Interventions targeting information, emotional support, practical advice, and motivational support • Unclear how the different elements contribute to positive outcomes • Few effective psychosocial interventions exist (Hackett et. al. 2008a,b; Knapp et. al. 2000; Redfern et al. 2006; Smith et. al. 2008; Ellis et. al. 2010; Lund 2012) UK MRC framework for developing and evaluating complex interventions (Craig et al. 2008) UK MRC framework for developing and evaluating complex interventions (Craig et al. 2008) Identifying evidence & theory Review of literature Qualitative review and synthesis Development of initial intervention protocol Modeling process & outcomes Critical review and consensus process involving stroke patients, relatives, clinical experts, health care leaders & researchers Finalizing intervention protocol for exploratory trial Exploratory trial Initial testing Assessment of intervention content, structure & process Assessment of usability to patients & professionals Assessment of methodological issues Theoretical assumptions • Health and wellbeing defined as a sense of coherence: Life experiences are comprehensible, manageable & meaningful (Antonovsky) • Quality of life defined as psychosocial wellbeing –A basic sense of contentment –Meaningful activities –Close and reciprocal relations –A positive self concept, self acceptance, usefulness and belief in one’s own abilities (Næss) • Story telling – narrative psychology –A basic human approach to create meaning and coherence in experiences (Polkinghorne, Mattingly, Frank) • Guided self determination - a method to support empowerment and coping (Zoffmann) • Supported dialogues for adults with aphasia (Kagan) The intervention • 8 individual 1 hour meetings between stroke survivor and health care professional • For each meeting, worksheets addressing psychosocial aspects are developed • Worksheets and communication is adjusted to persons with aphasia Introduction What happened? What is important for you? Bodily changes after stroke Everyday life and emotions Problem solving, activities of daily life and social relationships Living with the stroke Coping and balancing activities Final meeting of the intervention • Summarize the meetings and progress – How far in the rehabilitation have they come? – How does the future look? – What and who is important to them to continue progress? – How is life going to be? Look at worksheets that have been important in the meetings UK MRC framework for developing and evaluating complex interventions (Craig et al. 2008) Initial testing Assessment of intervention content, structure & process Assessment of usability to patients & professionals Assessment of methodological issues Finalizing protocol for Randomized controlled trial Randomized controlled trial Intervention group Evaluation Control group Assessing effectiveness of intervention Assessment of intervention content, structure & process Assessment of usability to patients & professionals Assessment of methodological issues A randomized, single blind, controlled trial • Power calculation based on GHQ-28 • 400 patients – 200 intervention – 200 control • Inclusion criteria • Blinded data collection: – T1: 1 month post stroke – T2: 6 months post stroke – T3: 12 months post stroke Recruitment T1 interview at 1 month Randomization Intervention group Control group 5 month intervention Regular follow up T2 interview at 6 months T2 interview at 6 months T3 interview at 12 months T3 interview at 12 months Assessing effectiveness Instrument Type of variable Data collection General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-28) Primary outcome T1, T2, T3 Stroke and Aphasia Quality of Life scale (SAQOL) Secondary outcome T1, T2, T3 Sense of Coherence (SOC-13) Secondary/inter mediate T1, T2, T3 Ullevål Aphasia Screening (UAS) Characteristics of sample T1 The Yale Brown single item questionnaire (Yale) Characteristics of sample T1, T2, T3 Lee’s fatigue scale (Lee 5) Characteristics of sample T1, T2, T3 Fatigue Questionnaire-2 (FQ-2) Characteristics of sample T1, T2, T3 Status of RCT (as of Nov 5th 2015) 9 hospitals recruiting participants: •180 participants enrolled • 31 drop-outs •149 active participants – 68 interventions • 8 participants not yet randomized – Data collection at T3 recently started Evaluation (Craig et al. 2008) • Assessing effectiveness – RCT currently in process of recruitment • Designing strategy to evaluate intervention 1. Participants from the intervention group • Individual qualitative interviews 2. Health care personnel delivering the intervention • Focus group interviews • Field notes 3. Analysis of drop-outs Experiences so far… • Time frame for recruitment • Attrition rate (drop outs) – Drop outs from the control group – Drop outs from the intervention group – Natural causes • Positive feedback from intervention participants Research team • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Marit Kirkevold (PI) (RN, professor nursing), University of Oslo (UiO) Unni Sveen (co-PI) (OT, professor), Oslo University Hospital (OUS)/Oslo University College of Applied Sciences (HIOA) Line Kildal Bragstad (OT, PhD), Postdoc, OUS/UiO Ellen Gabrielsen Hjelle (OT), PhD Candidate, UiO Berit Bronken (RN, PhD), Hedmark University College Randi Martinsen (RN, Phd), Hedmark University College Kari Kvigne (RN, professor nursing), Hedmark University College Margrete Mangset (RN, PhD), researcher, OUS Siren Eriksen (RN, PhD), Editor/researcher, Norwegian National Advisory Unit on Ageing and Health (Ageing and Health) Torgeir Bruun Wyller (MD, professor geriatrics), OUS/UiO Gabriele Kitzmüller (RN, PhD), Narvik University College Dag Hofoss, Political science, Epidemiologist/statistician, Professor, UiO Karianne Berg, NTNU & Line Haaland, Speech therapists, Bredtvedt Kompetansesenter Katerina Hilari (Psychologist/Assoc. Prof. City University) Liz Lightbody (RN, Senior researcher, University of Central Lancashire) A special thanks to recruitment personnel in the hospitals, interventionists and data collectors.
© Copyright 2024