Background: A partner’s stroke can be perceived as a critical event by a spouse. Previous studies have focused primarily on the impact of stroke on spouses’ psychosocial well-being over the long term. However, the experience of spouses in the ”rst phase after stroke is not well known.
Aim: To investigate spouses’ perception of their future daily life after stroke and the association between this perception and the objective characteristics of the stroke.
Method: Eighty-three consecutively enrolled spouses of ”rst-ever stroke patients <75 years admitted to Sahlgrenska University Hospital in Göteborg, Sweden participated. The mean age of the spouses was 57 years. Sixty-two of the spouses were women and 21 men. Interviews about their experiences 10 days after onset were generally made at the hospital. The interviews were analysed, categorized and combined with statistical analyses of variables such as ages and sex of the spouses, type of lesion and presence of neurological impairments in the stroke patient.
Results: Four different categories of the concept ‘view of the future’ were developed on the basis of the interviews. Of the different characteristics of the stroke, the severity of the sensorimotor impairment seemed to have the greatest impact on the spouses’ view of the future. The spouses of stroke patients with pure sensorimotor impairment were more likely to have an optimistic view of the future than when the sensorimotor impairment was combined with cognitive de”cits. There was a broad distribution of the different characteristics of stroke between the four categories.
Conclusions: Although the perception of future daily life varied, it was possible to categorize the spouses’ cognitive image of future life according to degree of optimism. While the severity of stroke was of importance, the individual perception of the disease, impact on future activities and the spouses’ own coping capacity was of great signi”cance for the perception of future daily life.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bannister R. Disorders of the cerebral circulation. Cerebral ischaemia. In: Brain’s clinical neurology, sixth edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985: 287–307.
2.
Glass TA, Matchar DB, Belyea M, Feussner JR.Impact of social support on outcome in ”rst stroke. Stroke1993; 24: 64–70.
3.
Evans RL, Bishop DS, Haselkorn JK. Factors predicting satisfactory home care after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil1991; 72: 144–147.
4.
Dennis M, O’Rourke S, Lewis S, Sharpe M, Warlow C. A quantitative study of the emotional outcome of people caring for stroke survivors. Stroke1998; 29: 1867–1872.
5.
Greveson GC, Gray CS, French JM, James OF. Long-term outcome for patients and carers following hospital admission for stroke. Age Ageing1991; 20: 337–344.
6.
Tompkins CA, Schulz R, Rau MT. Post-stroke depression in primary support persons: predicting those at risk. J Consult Clin Psychol1988; 56: 502–508.
7.
Kotila M, Numminen H, Waltimo O, Kaste M. Depression after stroke: results of the FINNSTROKE study. Stroke1998; 29: 368–372.
8.
Anderson CS, Linto J, Stewart Wynne EG. A population-based assessment of the impact and burden of caregiving for long-term stroke survivors. Stroke1995; 26: 843–849.
9.
Schulz R, Tompkins CA, Rau MT. A longitudinal study of the psychosocial impact of stroke on primary support persons. Psychol Aging1988; 3: 131–141.
10.
Wade DT, Legh Smith J, Hewer RL. Effects of living with and looking after survivors of a stroke. Br Med J Clin Res Ed1986; 293: 418–420.
11.
Lazarus RS, Folkman S. Stress, appraisal and coping. New York: Springer, 1984.
12.
Wellwood I, Dennis M, Warlow C. Patients’ and carers’ satisfaction with acute stroke management. Age Ageing1995; 24: 519–524.
13.
Rosenthal SG, Pituch MJ, Greninger LO, Metress ES. Perceived needs of wives of stroke patients. Rehabil Nurs1993; 18: 148–153, 167.
14.
Bamford J, Sandercock P, Dennis M, Burn J, Warlow C. Classi”cation and natural history of clinically identi”able subtypes of cerebral infarction. Lancet1991; 337: 1521–1526.
15.
Adams HP, Jr, Bendixen BH, Kappelle LJ et al. Classi”cation of subtype of acute ischemic stroke. De”nitions for use in a multicenter clinical trial. TOAST. Trial of Org 10172 in Acute Stroke Treatment. Stroke1993; 24: 35–41.
16.
Mahoney FI, Barthel DW. Functional evaluation: The Barthel Index. Md State Med J1965; 14: 61–65.
17.
Strauss A, Corbin J. Basics for qualitative research. Techniques and procedures for developing Grounded Theory, second edition. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, 1998.
18.
Waltz CF, Strickland OL, Lenz ER. Measurement in nursing research. Philadelphia: FA Davis, 1984.
19.
Bradley JV. Distribution-free statistical tests. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1968.
20.
Altman DG. Practical statistics for medical research. London: Chapman and Hall, 1991.
21.
Lynn McHale DJ, Smith A. Comprehensive assessment of families of the critically ill. AACN Clin Issues Crit Care Nurs1991; 2: 195–209.
22.
Wilcock AA. An occupational perspective of health. Thorofare: SLACK, 1998.
23.
Kielhofner G. A model of human occupation. Theory and application, second edition. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins, 1995.
24.
Kleiber C, Halm M, Titler M et al. Emotional responses of family members during a critical care hospitalization. Am J Crit Care1994; 3: 70–76.
25.
Antonovsky A. Unraveling the mystery of health. How people manage stress and stay well, ”rst edition. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1987.
26.
Wade DT, Hewer RL. Functional abilities after stroke: measurement, natural history and prognosis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry1987; 50: 177–182.
27.
Clark WM, Hourihane JM. Clinical stroke scales. In: Herndon RM, ed. Handbook of neurological rating scales. New York: Demos Vermande, 1997: 161–182.
28.
Nationella riktlinjer för strokesjukvård(National guidelines for stroke health care). Stockholm: The National Board of Health and Welfare, 2000.
