Recovery needs and psychosocial rehabilitation trajectory of stroke survivors (PReTS): A qualitative systematic review of systematic reviews

Abstract

Objective

Stroke has a major impact on a person's life. While much research exists on stroke prevention and treatment, explorations into psychosocial recovery needs are lacking. This review critically consolidates the challenges and needs of stroke survivors and develops a trajectory that encapsulates their journey from illness to recovery.

Data sources

Six major databases were searched, including Academic Search Premier, CINAHL, Global Health, Medline, PsycArticles, and PsycINFO.

Methods

This review adhered to the PRISMA guidelines and employed the PICo (population, phenomena of interest, context) framework to screen for relevant qualitative reviews published between 1 January 2010 and 31 August 2023. Following full-text screening and the assessment of methodological quality using a modified version of the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews scale, a total of 17 reviews were included for thematic synthesis.

Results

Included reviews referenced 400 qualitative primary studies involving more than 5623 stroke survivors. Data synthesis revealed 18 themes that were further organized into six conceptual categories: (1) The unfamiliar body, (2) compassionate healthcare system, (3) holistic rehabilitation, (4) intrapersonal strength, (5) interpersonal relations, and (6) thriving forward to form the psychosocial rehabilitation trajectory of stroke survivor (PReTS) model. The model recognizes the losses that can occur after a stroke and emphasizes the essentiality of addressing psycho-socio-emotional and spiritual needs alongside physical impairments.

Conclusion

The PReTS model is the first to highlight stroke survivors’ losses, recovery journeys, and psychosocial needs. The conceptualization serves to inform and advance stroke rehabilitation practices with holistic and wellness recovery research.

Keywords

Stroke survivors stroke rehabilitation psychosocial non-death losses meaning reconstruction

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Lindsay

Norrving

Sacco

, et al. World Stroke Organization (WSO): global Stroke Fact Sheet 2019. Int J Stroke 2019; 14: 806–817.

Minshall

Pascoe

Thompson

, et al. Psychosocial interventions for stroke survivors, carers and survivor-carer dyads: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Top Stroke Rehabil 2019; 26: 554–564.

Rudd

Bowen

Young

, et al. The latest national clinical guideline for stroke. Clin Med 2017; 17: 154.

Hoffmann

Ownsworth

Eames

, et al. Evaluation of brief interventions for managing depression and anxiety symptoms during early discharge period after stroke: a pilot randomized controlled trial. Top Stroke Rehabil 2015; 22: 116–126.

Donnellan

Hickey

Hevey

, et al. Effect of mood symptoms on recovery one year after stroke. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 2010; 25: 1288–1295.

Fure

Wyller

Engedal

, et al. Emotional symptoms in acute ischemic stroke. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 2006; 21: 382–387.

Tang

Lau

Mok

, et al. Impact of anxiety on health-related quality of life after stroke: a cross-sectional study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2013; 94: 2535–2541.

Thomas

Lincoln

. Predictors of emotional distress after stroke. Stroke 2008; 39: 1240–1245.

Janoff-Bulman

. Assumptive worlds and the stress of traumatic events: applications of the schema construct. Soc Cogn 1989; 7: 113–136.

10.

Harris

. Non-death loss and grief: laying the foundation. In: Non-death loss and grief. New York, NY: Routledge, 2019, pp.7–16.

11.

Crowfoot

Van Der Riet

Maguire

. Real-life experiences of people with transient ischaemic attack or minor stroke: a qualitative literature review. J Clin Nurs 2018; 27: 1381–1398.

12.

Liberati

Altman

Tetzlaff

, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. J Clin Epidemiol 2009; 62: e1–e34.

13.

Methley

Campbell

Chew-Graham

, et al. PICO, PICOS and SPIDER: a comparison study of specificity and sensitivity in three search tools for qualitative systematic reviews. BMC Health Serv Res 2014; 14: 1–10.

14.

Lou

Carstensen

Jørgensen

, et al. Stroke patients’ and informal carers’ experiences with life after stroke: an overview of qualitative systematic reviews. Disabil Rehabil 2017; 39: 301–313.

15.

Shea

Hamel

Wells

, et al. AMSTAR is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol 2009; 62: 1013–1020.

16.

Choo

Shaik

Tan-Ho

, et al. Living losses in stroke caregiving: a qualitative systematic review of systematic reviews on psycho-socio-emotional challenges and coping mechanisms. Int J Stroke 2023; 18: 268–277.

17.

Page

McKenzie

Bossuyt

, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Int J Surg 2021; 88: 105906.

18.

Toye

Seers

Allcock

, et al. Meta-ethnography 25 years on: challenges and insights for synthesising a large number of qualitative studies. BMC Med Res Methodol 2014; 14: 1–14.

19.

Thomas

Harden

. Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol 2008; 8: 45.

20.

Luker

Lynch

Bernhardsson

, et al. Stroke survivors’ experiences of physical rehabilitation: a systematic review of qualitative studies. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2015; 96: 1698–1708. e1610.

21.

Lawton

Haddock

Conroy

, et al. Therapeutic alliances in stroke rehabilitation: a meta-ethnography. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2016; 97: 1979–1993.

22.

Lloyd

Bannigan

Sugavanam

, et al. Experiences of stroke survivors, their families and unpaid carers in goal setting within stroke rehabilitation: a systematic review of qualitative evidence. JBI Evidence Synthesis 2018; 16: 1418–1453.

23.

Peoples

Satink

Steultjens

. Stroke survivors’ experiences of rehabilitation: a systematic review of qualitative studies. Scand J Occup Ther 2011; 18: 163–171.

24.

Plant

Tyson

Kirk

, et al. What are the barriers and facilitators to goal-setting during rehabilitation for stroke and other acquired brain injuries? A systematic review and meta-synthesis. Clin Rehabil 2016; 30: 921–930.

25.

Reed

Wood

Harrington

, et al. Developing stroke rehabilitation and community services: a meta-synthesis of qualitative literature. Disabil Rehabil 2012; 34: 553–563.

26.

Sarre

Redlich

Tinker

, et al. A systematic review of qualitative studies on adjusting after stroke: lessons for the study of resilience. Disabil Rehabil 2014; 36: 716–726.

27.

Walsh

Galvin

Loughnane

, et al. Factors associated with community reintegration in the first year after stroke: a qualitative meta-synthesis. Disabil Rehabil 2015; 37: 1599–1608.

28.

Woodman

Riazi

Pereira

, et al. Social participation post stroke: a meta-ethnographic review of the experiences and views of community-dwelling stroke survivors. Disabil Rehabil 2014; 36: 2031–2043.

29.

Wray

Clarke

. Longer-term needs of stroke survivors with communication difficulties living in the community: a systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies. BMJ Open 2017; 7: e017944.

30.

Manning

Macfarlane

Hickey

, et al. Perspectives of people with aphasia post-stroke towards personal recovery and living successfully: a systematic review and thematic synthesis. PLOS ONE 2019; 14: e0214200.

31.

Pindus

Mullis

Lim

, et al. Stroke survivors’ and informal caregivers’ experiences of primary care and community healthcare services–a systematic review and meta-ethnography. PloS one 2018; 13: e0192533.

32.

Rosewilliam

Roskell

Pandyan

. A systematic review and synthesis of the quantitative and qualitative evidence behind patient-centred goal setting in stroke rehabilitation. Clin Rehabil 2011; 25: 501–514.

33.

Anderson

Keating

. Marriage after the transition to stroke: a systematic review. Ageing Soc 2018; 38: 2241–2279.

34.

Harris

Bettger

. Parenting after stroke: a systematic review. Top Stroke Rehabil 2018; 25: 1–9.

35.

McGrath

Lever

McCluskey

, et al. How is sexuality after stroke experienced by stroke survivors and partners of stroke survivors? A systematic review of qualitative studies. Clin Rehabil 2019; 33: 293–303.

36.

Brannigan

Galvin

Walsh

, et al. Barriers and facilitators associated with return to work after stroke: a qualitative meta-synthesis. Disabil Rehabil 2017; 39: 211–222.

37.

Wade

Halligan

. Do biomedical models of illness make for good healthcare systems? Br Med J 2004; 329: 1398–1401.

38.

World Health Organization. Towards a common language for functioning, disability, and health : ICF. The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health 2002.

39.

Kendall

Catalano

Kuipers

, et al. Recovery following stroke: the role of self-management education. Soc Sci Med 2007; 64: 735–746.

40.

Peterson-Burch

Reuter-Rice

Barr

. Rethinking recovery: incorporating holistic nursing perspectives in post-stroke care. Holist Nurs Pract 2017; 31: 3.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.02 MB