Search

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]

Background: Therapeutic relationships are fundamental in aphasia rehabilitation, influencing patient experience and outcomes. While we have good understandings of the components of therapeutic relationships, there has been little exploration of how and why therapists construct and enact relationships as they do. Sociological theories may help develop nuanced understanding of the values, assumptions and structures that influence practice, and may facilitate critical reflexivity on practice. Aims: To explore the potential for theoretical approaches from outside speech–language therapy to enable a deeper understanding of the nature and enactment of therapeutic relationships in aphasia rehabilitation. Methods & Procedures: An explanatory single case study of one speech–language therapist–patient dyad in an in‐patient stroke rehabilitation setting. Data included observations of five interactions, two interviews with the client and three interviews with the speech–language therapist. Analysis was guided by analytical pluralism that applied aspects of three sociological theories to guide data analysis and make visible the contextual factors that surround, shape and permeate the enactment of therapeutic relationships. Outcomes & Results: The analysis of this dyad made visible individual, interactional and broader structural features that illustrate the dynamic processes that practitioners and patients undertake to enact therapeutic relationships. Clinical practice could be viewed as a performance with each person continually negotiating how they convey different impressions to others, which shapes what work is valued and foregrounded. The patient and therapist took up or were placed in different positions within the interactions, each with associated expectations and rights, which influenced what types of relationships could, or were likely to, develop. Organizational, rehabilitation and individual practitioner structures assigned rules and boundaries that shaped how the therapist developed and enacted the therapeutic relationship. Whilst the therapist had some agency in her work and could resist the different influencing factors, such resistance was constrained because these structures had become highly internalized and routinized and was not always visible to the therapist. Conclusions & Implications: While therapists commonly value therapeutic relationships, social and structural factors consciously and unconsciously influence their ability to prioritize relational work. Sociological theories can provide new lenses on our practice that can assist therapists to be critically reflexive about practice, and to enact changes to how they work to enhance therapeutic relationships with clients. What this paper addsWhat is already known on the subjectTherapeutic relationships are critical in aphasia rehabilitation. We have a good understanding of the different components of therapeutic relationships and how relationships are perceived by patients and practitioners.What this paper adds to existing knowledgeThis study is novel in its use of sociological lenses to explore contexts and complexities inherent in building and maintaining therapeutic relationships. These are often invisible to the practitioner but can have a significant impact on how relational work is enacted and what forms of relationship are possible.What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?This study will support clinicians to critically reflect on how they enact therapeutic relationships and may enhance awareness of the often‐hidden factors which influence the ways in which they work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Hope is a critical resource for people with aphasia after stroke, sustaining people though times of distress and uncertainty and providing motivation. In the first months after stroke, hope is vulnerable to different influences, and people can struggle to identify and work towards hopes for the future. We have little knowledge about how people with aphasia experience hope in the longer term after stroke. Objectives: To identify how people with aphasia experience hope 1 year after stroke and how hope may change in the year after stroke. Methods: The study used an Interpretive Description methodology. Interviews were conducted with four people with aphasia who had been interviewed 1 year previously. These were analysed using content analysis. Results: All people reported a broad sense of hope for the future. They described an active process of recalibrating their early poststroke hopes through a process of reflecting on past progress, current function and what they considered might be possible and desirable in the future. People were able to develop 'new' hopes that were meaningful and seemingly achievable when they had a sense of a possible, desirable future. Those who struggled to see a possible future maintained a hope that things will be good. Social supports, a sense of progress, engagement in meaningful activities and interactions appeared crucial in helping people (re)develop hopes for their future. Conclusions: Hope and hopes for the future gradually changed after stroke. Hope, identity and social connectedness were closely entwined and could enable people to both dwell in the present and move towards desired futures. This research suggests clinicians should prioritise creating hope‐fostering environments which support people to develop hope for their future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: Engagement is commonly considered important in stroke rehabilitation, with some arguing it is essential for positive patient outcomes. An emerging body of research indicates the practitioner influences engagement through their ways of relating, communicating and working with the patient. People experiencing communication disability may face particular challenges with engagement as a practitioner's communication and interactional patterns may limit their ability to engage. Aims: To understand how rehabilitation practitioners worked to engage people experiencing communication disability throughout the course of rehabilitation. Methods & Procedures: A qualitative study using the Voice Centred Relational Approach. Longitudinal observational and interview data were gathered from 28 practitioners and three people experiencing communication disability in inpatient and community stroke rehabilitation services. Data were analyzed using the Listening Guide. Outcomes & Results: Engagement was a relational practice on the part of the rehabilitation practitioner. It was underpinned by a relational philosophy and characterized by three core processes: embedding relational work throughout rehabilitation; getting to know the patient and working in ways valued by the patient; and communicating using relational dialogue and supported conversation. Practitioners wove these together with their technical, disciplinary‐based work and rehabilitation tasks. Conclusions & Implications: Patient engagement was constructed through relationships and strongly influenced by the practitioners’ way of thinking about and enacting practice, challenging the idea that engagement is solely an intrinsic patient state and behaviour. The findings raise questions about which aspects of rehabilitation work and communication are most valuable when working to engage people experiencing communication disability. Viewing engagement as a relational practice and understanding the different ways this is enacted may support practitioners to reflect on their understandings of engagement, their patient's engagement, their ways of working, and the frames and philosophies that surround and influence their practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: In this paper, we critically investigate the implementation of person-centered care with the purpose of advancing philosophical debates regarding the overarching aims and delivery of rehabilitation. While general agreement exists regarding person centered care's core principles, how practitioners reconcile the implementation of these principles with competing practice demands remains an open question. Materials and methods: For the paper, we drew on post-qualitative methods to engage in a process of "diffractive" analysis wherein we analyzed the micro-doings of person-centered care in everyday rehabilitation work. Working from our team members' diverse experiences, traditions, and epistemological commitments, we engaged with data from nine "care events" generated in previous research to interrogate the multiple forces that co-produce care practices. Results: We map our analyses under three categories: scripts mediate practice, securing compliance through "benevolent manipulations", and care(ful) tinkering. In the latter, we explore the notion of tinkering as a useful concept for approaching person centered care. Uncertainty, humility, and doubt in one's expertise are inherent to tinkering, which involves a continual questioning of what to do, what is best, and what is person centered care within each moment of care. The paper concludes with a discussion of the implications for rehabilitation and person-centered care. Determinations of what constitutes good, better, or best rehabilitation practices are inevitably questions of ethics. Person-centered care is promoted as good practice in rehabilitation because it provides a framework for attending to the personhood of all engaged in clinical encounters. Post-critical analyses suggest that multiple interacting forces, conditions, assumptions, and actions intersect in shaping each rehabilitation encounter such that what constitutes good care or person-centered care cannot be determined in advance. "Tinkering" is a potentially useful approach that involves a continual questioning of what to do, what is best, and what is person-centered care within each moment of care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]