Search

Psychosocial well-being is key to living well after stroke, but often significantly affected by stroke. Existing understandings consider well-being comes from positive mood, social relationships, self-identity and engagement in meaningful activities. However, these understandings are socioculturally located and not necessarily universally applicable. This qualitative metasynthesis examined how people experience well-being after a stroke in Aotearoa New Zealand. This metasynthesis was underpinned by He Awa Whiria (Braided Rivers), a model which prompts researchers to uniquely engage with Māori and non-Māori knowledges. A systematic search identified 18 articles exploring experiences of people with stroke in Aotearoa. Articles were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. We constructed three themes which reflect experiences of well-being: connection within a constellation of relationships, being grounded in one's enduring and evolving identities, and being at-home in the present whilst (re)visioning the future. Well-being is multi-faceted. In Aotearoa, it is inherently collective while also deeply personal. Well-being is collectively achieved through connections with self, others, community and culture, and embedded within personal and collective temporal worlds. These rich understandings of well-being can open up different considerations of how well-being is supported by and within stroke services. Psychosocial well-being is critical for people living with stroke. Well-being should be a priority in rehabilitation, however people with stroke indicate they do no consistently receive psychosocial support. It is clear that well-being has strong cultural elements, and understanding what supports well-being in individuals, whānau (those within wider networks who the person with stroke considers important), and wider cultural groups is important. Supporting whānau is crucial as whānau are core to well-being both during and beyond rehabilitation, and their own well-being is impacted by stroke. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Following stroke, a sense of well‐being is critical for quality of life. However, people living with stroke, and health professionals, suggest that well‐being is not sufficiently addressed within stroke services, contributing to persistent unmet needs. Knowing that systems and structures shape clinical practice, this study sought to understand how health professionals address well‐being, and to examine how the practice context influences care practice. Methods: Underpinned by Interpretive Description methodology, we interviewed 28 health professionals across multiple disciplines working in stroke services (acute and rehabilitation) throughout New Zealand. Data were analysed using applied tension analysis. Results: Health professionals are managing multiple lines of work in stroke care: biomedical work of investigation, intervention and prevention; clinical work of assessment, monitoring and treatment; and moving people through service. While participants reported working to support well‐being, this could be deprioritised amidst the time‐oriented pressures of the other lines of work that were privileged within services, rendering it unsupported and invisible. Conclusion: Stroke care is shaped by biomedical and organisational imperatives that privilege physical recovery and patient throughput. Health professionals are not provided with the knowledge, skills, time or culture of care that enable them to privilege well‐being within their work. This has implications for the well‐being of people with stroke, and the well‐being of health professionals. In making these discourses and culture visible, and tracing how these impact on clinical practice, we hope to provide insight into why well‐being work remains other to the 'core' work of stroke, and what needs to be considered if stroke services are to better support people's well‐being. Patient or Public Contributions: People with stroke, family members and people who provide support to people with stroke, and health professionals set priorities for this research. They advised on study conduct and have provided feedback on wider findings from the research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This study aimed to determine the effect of different air velocities on heat exchange and performance during prolonged self-paced exercise in the heat. Methods: Twelve male cyclists performed a 700-kJ time trial in four different air velocity conditions (still air, 16, 30, and 44 km·h-1) in 32°C and 40% relative humidity. Performance, thermal, cardiovascular, and perceptual responses were measured, and heat balance parameters were estimated using partitional calorimetry, including the maximum potential for sweat evaporation (Emax). Results: Mean power output was lower in still air (232 ± 42 W) than 16 (247 ± 30 W), 30 (250 ± 32 W), and 44 km·h-1 (248 ± 32 W; all P < 0.001), but similar between the 16-, 30-, and 44-km·h-1 air velocity conditions (P = 0.275). Emax was lower in still air (160 ± 13 W·m-2) than 16 (298 ± 25 W·m-2), 30 (313 ± 23 W·m-2), and 44 km·h-1 (324 ± 31 W·m-2) and lower in 16 than 44 km·h-1 (all P < 0.001). Peak core temperature was higher in still air (39.4°C ± 0.7°C) than 16 (39.0°C ± 0.45°C), 30 (38.8°C ± 0.3°C), and 44 km·h-1 (38.8°C ± 0.5°C; all P ≤ 0.002). Mean skin temperature was lower with greater airflow (P < 0.001) but similar in 30 and 40 km·h-1 (P = 1.00). Mean heart rate was ~2 bpm higher in still air than 44 km·h-1 (P = 0.035). RPE was greater in still air than 44 km·h-1 (P = 0.017). Conclusions: Self-paced cycling in still air was associated with a lower Emax and subsequently higher thermal strain, along with a similar or greater cardiovascular strain, despite work rate being lower than in conditions with airflow. The similarity in performance between the 16-, 30-, and 44-km·h-1 air velocity conditions suggests that airflow ≥16 km·h-1 does not further benefit self-paced exercise performance in the heat because of modest improvements in evaporative efficiency. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: Therapeutic connections enhance patient experience and outcomes after neurological injury or illness. While we have some understanding of the components necessary to optimise therapeutic connections, these have developed from western-centric ideals. This study sought to explore the perspectives of Māori brain injury survivors, and their whānau (wider family and community), to develop more culturally informed understandings of what matters most for Māori in the development and experience of therapeutic connection. Design and Methods: A bicultural approach underpinned by principles of Kaupapa Māori Research was used. Whānau views and experiences were gathered through wānanga (focus groups). These perspectives were analysed drawing on Māori methods of noho puku (self-reflection), whanaungatanga (relational linkage) and kaitiakitanga (guardianship). Findings: Three wānanga were held with 16 people – 5 brain injury survivors and 11 whānau members. The phrase 'therapeutic connection' did not resonate; instead, people spoke of meaningful connections. For rehabilitation encounters to be meaningful, three layers of connection were acknowledged. The elemental layer features wairua (spirit) and hononga (connection) which both underpinned and surrounded interactions. The relational layer reflects the importance of whānau identity and collectivism, of being valued, known, and interactively spoken with. Finally, the experiential layer consists of relational aspects important within the experience: relationships of reciprocity that are mana-enhancing and grounded in trust. These layers are interwoven, and together serve as a framework for meaningful connections. Conclusions: Meaningful connections in neurorehabilitation are underpinned by wairua and hononga; are multi-layered; are enabled through interactions with people, practice, process and place; are inclusive of whānau and resonate with Māori worldviews. The primacy of wairua and whānau within an interconnected view of health, challenges individualistic notions inherent in western health models and deepens existing understandings of meaningful connections in neurorehabilitation which can guide future rehabilitation research, teaching and practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

AbstractPurposeMethodsResultsConclusions\nIMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONRehabilitation plays a critical role in minimising disability after stroke, with the concept of “challenge” proposed to be essential to rehabilitation efficacy and outcomes. This review unpacks how challenge is conceptualised in stroke rehabilitation literature from the perspectives of physiotherapy, occupational therapy, speech-language therapy and people with stroke. A secondary purpose was to provide a definition of challenge that is applicable to stroke rehabilitation.Principle-based concept analysis was utilised to examine challenge within the stroke rehabilitation literature. Forty-two papers were included. Data analysis involved immersion, analytical questioning, coding and synthesis to elicit the conceptual components of challenge.Challenge was understood as a multidimensional and dynamic concept with three facets: nominal, functional and perceived challenge. Functional and perceived challenge were integral to optimal challenge. Optimal challenge was central to enhancing the outcomes and experiences of people with stroke, in rehabilitation and everyday life.Challenge is a key concept which, when carefully optimised to the person’s ability and experience, may positively influence their learning, recovery and engagement after stroke. This review lays a conceptual foundation for better understanding, operationalisation and advancement of challenge, offering important implications for addressing the growing burden of stroke disability, through rehabilitation.Challenge involves a multifaceted, multidimensional and dynamic interaction between the task, the person’s ability and their subjective experience.The therapist and the person’s perspective should collectively shape the process of co-creating a challenge that is truly optimal for the person.Therapists should consider both functional and perceived approaches to operationalising challenge with the person.Challenge involves a multifaceted, multidimensional and dynamic interaction between the task, the person’s ability and their subjective experience.The therapist and the person’s perspective should collectively shape the process of co-creating a challenge that is truly optimal for the person.Therapists should consider both functional and perceived approaches to operationalising challenge with the person. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: Engagement is increasingly recognised as important for maximising rehabilitation outcome following stroke. However, engagement can be challenging when neurological impairment impacts a persons' ability to activate the regulatory processes necessary for engagement and in the context of a changed self. We explored engagement in stroke rehabilitation from the perspective of people with stroke with a primary focus on identifying key processes that appeared important to engagement in stroke rehabilitation. Design and Methods: This study drew on Interpretive Description methodology. Maximum variation and theoretical sampling were used to capture diversity in the sample and access a depth and breadth of perspectives. Data collection included semi-structured interviews with people with stroke (n = 19). Data were analysed through a collaborative and iterative process drawing on range of analytical tools including coding, memoing, diagramming and group discussions. Findings: Our findings highlight that engagement is a complex, nuanced, responsive, flexible and inherently two-way process. Developing connections appeared central to engagement with connections taking various forms. The most fundamental was the therapeutic connection between the person with stroke and their practitioner as it provided the foundation on which to build other connections. Connection was made possible through five collaborative processes: Knowing, Entrusting, Adapting, Investing and Reciprocating. Conclusions: Engagement is a social and relational process enabled through an inherently person-centred approach and active and ongoing reflexivity – highlighting the importance of a humanising approach to care where aspects of self, care and emotion are evident, for both the person with stroke and their practitioner. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]