4.4 Article

Self-management and adherence with exercise-based falls prevention programmes: a qualitative study to explore the views and experiences of older people and physiotherapists

期刊

DISABILITY AND REHABILITATION
卷 36, 期 5, 页码 379-386

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.3109/09638288.2013.797507

关键词

Adherence; exercise-based falls prevention programmes; older people; physiotherapists; self-management

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: The aim of this study was to involve older people and physiotherapists in the development of acceptable strategies to promote uptake and adherence with an exercise-based falls prevention programme. Method: Focus groups were conducted with older people attending a regional falls and syncope service (3 groups, total 12 participants) and local physiotherapists (4 groups, total 18 participants). Framework analysis was undertaken to identify why uptake and adherence with an exercise-based falls prevention programme is currently poor and to provide suggestions for how it might be improved. Results: The older people participated in an exercise-based falls prevention programme to remain independent in activities of daily living. They valued approaches that promoted self-efficacy and self-management. In contrast, the physiotherapists perceived that many older people were reluctant to participate in an exercise-based falls prevention programme. While it was acknowledged that older people should be encouraged to take greater responsibility for the maintenance of their own health, the physiotherapists demonstrated a conflicting desire to remain in control of the treatment programme. Conclusions: A focus on self-management support may provide the key to promoting uptake and adherence with an exercise-based falls prevention programme. Physiotherapists should move from being experts to enablers who use their professional knowledge and expertise to support older people at risk of falling to maintain optimum levels of health and independence.

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