Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Globalization and Health
Published in: Globalization and Health 1/2018

Open Access 01-12-2018 | Research

A feasibility study of a mobile phone supported family-centred ADL intervention, F@ce™, after stroke in Uganda

Authors: Julius T. Kamwesiga, Gunilla M. Eriksson, Kerstin Tham, Uno Fors, Ali Ndiwalana, Lena von Koch, Susanne Guidetti

Published in: Globalization and Health | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

There is a lack of evidence-based health services to reduce the impact of stroke in low-income countries at a personal, family or community level.
The aim was to evaluate the feasibility of: i) a mobile phone supported family-centred intervention (F@ce™), and ii) the study design for evaluating the effects of the intervention on the perceived impact of stroke; perceived participation in everyday life; and self-efficacy in everyday activities amongst persons with stroke and their families in Uganda.

Methods

The study comprised a pre-post design with an intervention group (IG) receiving the F@ce™ and a control group (CG). The inclusion criteria’s were: a) confirmed stroke diagnosis, b) access to and ability to use a mobile phone, c) ability to communicate in English and/or Luganda, d) > 18 years, e) residents in Kampala, and f) a Modified Rankin Scale level 2 to 4.
The aim of the F@ceTM was to increase functioning in daily activities for persons living with the consequences of stroke, and participation in everyday life for persons with stroke and their families. The F@ce™ was an eight-week family-centred intervention, which entailed goal setting and problem-solving strategies, daily reminders and self-rated follow-ups of performance by short message service (SMS).
Data were collected in the participants’ home environment at baseline and after eight weeks. Data on acceptability of the F@ce™ and study procedures were collected by log-books and the responses of the SMS follow ups on the server. The primary outcomes were performance and satisfaction of valued daily activities in everyday life using the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM), self-efficacy in performance of activities in daily life.

Results

The IG comprised n = 13 and the CG n = 15. There were differences between the IG and CG in changes between baseline and follow-up in the primary outcomes COPM (performance component) and self-efficacy in favour of F@ce™. Overall with minor modifications the intervention and the study design were feasible for all participants involved.

Conclusion

The results support the need for further research to rigorously evaluate the effects of F@ce™ since the intervention appears to be feasible for persons with stroke and their family members.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
2.
Owolabi M. Taming the burgeoning stroke epidemic in Africa: stroke quadrangle to the rescue. West Indian Med J. 2011;60(4):412–21.PubMed
3.
Adeloye D. An estimate of the incidence and prevalence of stroke in Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2014;9(6):e100724.CrossRef
4.
Mackay J, Mensah G. The atlas of heart disease and stroke World Health Organization; 2004.
5.
6.
Bergstrom AL, Eriksson G, von Koch L, Tham K. Combined life satisfaction of persons with stroke and their caregivers: associations with caregiver burden and the impact of stroke. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2011;9(1):1.CrossRef
7.
Rigby H, Gubitz G, Phillips S. A systematic review of caregiver burden following stroke. Int J Stroke. 2009;4(4):285–92.CrossRef
8.
Bertilsson AS, von Koch L, Tham K, Johansson U. Client-centred ADL intervention after stroke: significant others' experiences. Scand J Occup Ther. 2015;22(5):377–86.CrossRef
9.
Legg L, Drummond A, Leonardi-Bee J, Gladman JRF, Corr S, Donkervoort M, et al. Occupational therapy for patients with problems in personal activities of daily living after stroke: systematic review of randomised trials. BMJ. 2007;335(7626):922.CrossRef
10.
Steultjens EM, Dekker J, Bouter LM, van de Nes JC, Cup EH, van den Ende CH. Occupational therapy for stroke patients: a systematic review. Stroke. 2003;34(3):676–87.CrossRef
11.
Bertilsson AS, Ranner M, von Koch L, Eriksson G, Johansson U, Ytterberg C, et al. A client-centred ADL intervention: three-month follow-up of a randomized controlled trial. Scand J Occup Ther. 2014;21(5):377–91.CrossRef
12.
Flink M, Bertilsson AS, Johansson U, Guidetti S, Tham K, von Koch L. Training in client-centeredness enhances occupational therapist documentation on goal setting and client participation in goal setting in the medical records of people with stroke. Clin Rehabil. 2016;30(12):1200–10.CrossRef
13.
14.
15.
Wakeford L, Wittman P, White M. Schmeler M. Telerehabilitation position paper The American Journal of Occupational Therapy. 2004;59(6):656–60.
16.
Cason J. A pilot telerehabilitation program: delivering early intervention services to rural families. International Journal of Telerehabilitation. 2009;1(1):29–38.CrossRef
17.
Johansson T, Wild C. Telerehabilitation in stroke care--a systematic review. J Telemed Telecare. 2011;17(1):1–6.CrossRef
18.
Laver KE, Schoene D, Crotty M, George S, Lannin NA, Sherrington C. Telerehabilitation services for stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;12:CD010255.
19.
Chen J, Jin W, Zhang XX, Xu W, Liu XN, Ren CC. Telerehabilitation approaches for stroke patients: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2015;24(12):2660–8.CrossRef
20.
21.
Kamwesiga JT, Tham K, Guidetti S. Experiences of using mobile phones in everyday life among persons with stroke and their families in Uganda - a qualitative study. Disabil Rehabil. 2017;39(5):438–49.CrossRef
22.
Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, Michie S, Nazareth I, Petticrew M. Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ. 2008 Sep 29;337:a1655.CrossRef
23.
Guidetti S, Ranner M, Tham K, Andersson M, Ytterberg C, von Koch L. A "client-centred activities of daily living" intervention for persons with stroke: one-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial. J Rehabil Med. 2015;47(7):605–11.CrossRef
24.
Arain M, Campbell MJ, Cooper CL, Lancaster GA. What is a pilot or feasibility study? A review of current practice and editorial policy BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010;10:67.CrossRef
25.
Boutron I, Moher D, Altman DG, Schulz KF, Ravaud P. Extending the CONSORT statement to randomized trials of nonpharmacologic treatment: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med. 2008;148(4):295–309.CrossRef
26.
Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF, Montori V, Gotzsche PC, Devereaux PJ, et al. CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63(8):e1–37.CrossRef
27.
Bonita R, Beaglehole R. Recovery of motor function after stroke. Stroke. 1988;19(12):1497–500.CrossRef
28.
Kasner SE. Clinical interpretation and use of stroke scales. Lancet Neurol. 2006;5(7):603–12.CrossRef
29.
Hertzog M. Considerations in determining sample size for pilot studies. Research in nursing & health. 2008;31(2):180–91.CrossRef
30.
Tham K, Borell L, Gustavsson A. The discovery of disability: a phenomenological study of unilateral neglect. Am J Occup Ther. 2000;54(4):398–406.CrossRef
31.
Law M, Baptiste S, Mills J. Canadian occupational performance measure. Toronto: CAOT publications; 1991.
32.
Townsend E, Polatajko H, editors. Enabling occupation II: advancing an occupational therapy vision for health, wellbeing and justice through occupation. Ottawa, Ontario: CAOT publications ACE; 2007.
33.
Christensen H, Boysen G, Truelsen T. The Scandinavian stroke scale predicts outcome in patients with mild ischemic stroke. Cerebrovascular Dis (Basel, Switzerland. 2005;20(1):46–8.CrossRef
34.
Luvizutto GJ, Monteiro TA, Braga G, Pontes-Neto OM, de Lima Resende LA, Bazan R. Validation of the Scandinavian stroke scale in a multicultural population in Brazil. Cerebrovasc Dis Extra. 2012;2(1):121–6.CrossRef
35.
Askim T, Bernhardt J, Churilov L, Indredavik B. The Scandinavian stroke scale is equally as good as the National Institutes of Health stroke scale in identifying 3-month outcome. J Rehabil Med. 2016;48(10):909–12.CrossRef
36.
Barber M, Fail M, Shields M, Stott DJ, Langhorne P. Validity and reliability of estimating the scandinavian stroke scale score from medical records. Cerebrovascular Dis (Basel, Switzerland). 2004;17(2–3):224–7.CrossRef
37.
Law M, Baptiste S, McColl M, Opzoomer A, Polatajko H, Pollock N. The Canadian occupational performance measure: an outcome measure for occupational therapy. Can J Occup Ther. 1990;57(2):82–7.CrossRef
38.
Bandura A. Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioural change. Psychol Rev. 1977;84:191–215.CrossRef
39.
Bandura A, Adams NE, Beyer J. Cognitive processes mediating behavioral change. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1977;35(3):125–39.CrossRef
40.
Duncan PW, Wallace D, Lai SM, Johnson D, Embretson S, Laster LJ. The stroke impact scale version 2.0. Evaluation of reliability, validity, and sensitivity to change. Stroke. 1999;30(10):2131–40.CrossRef
41.
Duncan PW, Bode RK, Min Lai S, Perera S. Rasch analysis of a new stroke-specific outcome scale: the stroke impact scale. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2003;84(7):950–63.CrossRef
42.
Kamwesiga J, von Koch L, Kottorp A, Guidetti S. Cultural adaptation and validation of stroke impact scale 3.0 version in Uganda: a small-scale study. SAGE Open Medicine. 2016;4:1–10.CrossRef
43.
Gustavsson C, Denison E, von Koch L. Self-management of persistent neck pain: two-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial of a multicomponent group intervention in primary health care. Spine. 2011;36(25):2105–15.CrossRef
44.
Mahoney F, Barthel D. Functional evaluation: the Barthel index. Maryland St Med J. 1965;14:61–5.
45.
Guidetti S, Utbult M, Kamwesiga J, Eriksson G. Perceived occupational gaps among the Ugandan general population– a pilot study. Submitted.
46.
Eriksson G, Tham K, Borg J. Occupational gaps in everyday life 1-4 years after acquired brain injury. J Rehabil Med. 2006;38(3):159–65.CrossRef
47.
Eriksson G. Occupational Gaps Questionnaire, version 1.0/2013. Nacka: Swedish: Association of Occupational Therapists (FSA); 2013.
48.
Eriksson G, Tham K, Kottorp A. A cross-diagnostic validation of an instrument measuring participation in everyday occupations: the occupational gaps questionnaire (OGQ). Scand J Occup Ther. 2013;20(2):152–60.CrossRef
49.
Alers VM, RB. C. Occupational therapy: an African perspective. Johannesburg, South Africa: Sara Shortens Publishers; 2010.
50.
Ramugondo EL, Kronenburg F. Explaining collective occupations from a human relations perspective: bridging the individual-collective Dichotom. Journal of Occupational Science. 2015;22(1):3–16.CrossRef
51.
52.
Wade DT. Goal planning in stroke rehabilitation: evidence. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2015;6(2):37–42.CrossRef
53.
Winkelman WJ, Choo CW. Provider-sponsored virtual communities for chronic patients: improving health outcomes through organizational patient-centred knowledge management. Health Expect. 2003;6(4):352–8.CrossRef
54.
Fugl-Meyer AR, Hellström K, Lindmark B, Wahlberg B. Self-efficacy in relation to impairments and activities of daily living disability in elderly patients with stroke: a prospective investigation. J Rehabil Med. 2003;35(5):202–7.CrossRef
55.
Lorig KR, Sobel DS, Stewart AL, Brown BW Jr, Bandura A, Ritter P, et al. Evidence suggesting that a chronic disease self-management program can improve health status while reducing hospitalization: a randomized trial. Med Care. 1999;37(1):5–14.CrossRef
56.
Hart T, Bagiella E. Design and implementation of clinical trials in rehabilitation research. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2012;93(8 Suppl):S117–26.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
A feasibility study of a mobile phone supported family-centred ADL intervention, F@ce™, after stroke in Uganda
Authors
Julius T. Kamwesiga
Gunilla M. Eriksson
Kerstin Tham
Uno Fors
Ali Ndiwalana
Lena von Koch
Susanne Guidetti
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Globalization and Health / Issue 1/2018
Electronic ISSN: 1744-8603
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12992-018-0400-7

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

Globalization and Health 1/2018 Go to the issue

Research

The bumpy trajectory of performance-based financing for healthcare in Sierra Leone: agency, structure and frames shaping the policy process

Debate

Medical tourism and national health care systems: an institutionalist research agenda

Review

Approaches towards improving the quality of maternal and newborn health services in South Asia: challenges and opportunities for healthcare systems

Research

Health in Yemen: losing ground in war time

Review

Civil society in global health policymaking: a critical review

Research

Organizational capacities of national pharmacovigilance centres in Africa: assessment of resource elements associated with successful and unsuccessful pharmacovigilance experiences