4.4 Article

Living and ageing with stroke: an exploration of conditions influencing participation in social and leisure activities over 15 years

期刊

BRAIN INJURY
卷 32, 期 7, 页码 858-866

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/02699052.2018.1463561

关键词

Community integration; grounded theory; long-term stroke survivors; qualitative research; social participation

资金

  1. Ribbingska Foundation in Lund
  2. Region Skane
  3. Faculty of Medicine, Lund University
  4. Foundation of Fars & Frosta - one of Sparbanken Skane's ownership foundations
  5. Swedish Heart-Lung Foundation
  6. Freemasons Lodge of Instructions EOS Lund
  7. Swedish Stroke Association
  8. Swedish Research Council for Health, Working Life and Welfare (FORTE)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To explore conditions influencing long-term participation in social and leisure activities among people who have had a stroke.Methods: This study had a qualitative design, using a grounded theory methodology. Data collection was based on in-depth interviews performed 15years after a first-ever stroke with 10 persons recruited from a population-based stroke cohort in Sweden. The study also included four family members.Findings: Over time, the stroke meant a changed but gradually normalised life situation. Participation in social and leisure activities was influenced by several transacting personal and contextual conditions changing with time and ageing. Central conditions that emerged from the analysis included personal characteristics, having social and supportive networks, being dependent on others, having access to valued activities and contexts, being motivated to participate, and perceiving sufficient capacity to participate.Conclusions: Long-term participation after stroke is possible despite impairments, but is influenced by a range of personal and environmental conditions. Stroke rehabilitation should be based on an awareness of this influence and address conditions that change with time and ageing during different phases after stroke.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据