What matters most about the arm&how it affects life after stroke?v1
Research type
Research Study
Full title
What matters most about the arm and how it affects life after stroke? Gaining perspectives from stroke survivors, carers and health professionals.
IRAS ID
195397
Contact name
Julie Duncan Millar
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
Glasgow Caledonian University
Duration of Study in the UK
0 years, 11 months, 31 days
Research summary
BACKGROUND
Stroke is a leading cause of disability in adults (Adamson et al. 2004) and up to 66% of stroke survivors experience arm impairment (Kwakkel et al. 2003). Treatments for arm recovery and function following stroke are an important research priority as identified by stakeholders (stroke survivors, carers and health professionals; Pollock et al. 2014a). Many trials have investigated arm treatments. Researchers currently use many different measurements to assess the effects of the treatment (Foley et al. 2013). These measurements assess different aspects of the arm which researchers call ‘outcomes’.Having many different outcomes makes comparison of trial results difficult; and identifying the best treatment(s) is therefore challenging. Geyh et al. (2004) recommended stroke outcomes for use in research however these outcomes are not arm specific and stroke survivors were not involved in identifying which outcomes were most important or meaningful to them.
RESEARCH QUESTION
What matters most about the arm and how it affects life after a stroke from the perspectives of stroke survivors, carers and health professionals?METHODS
We will conduct focus groups using the Nominal Group Technique (NGT) and interview (audio recorded) with stroke survivors, carers and health professionals throughout Scotland to achieve agreement on what matters most about the arm and how it affects life after stroke.IMPLICATIONS
The findings from this study will inform planned consensus activities in 2016-17 which aim to standardise the outcome measures used in stroke arm rehabilitation trials. This will enable researchers to collect, compare and combine results to determine outcomes which are of greatest relevance to stakeholders. In turn, this will enable firm recommendations to be made to inform guidelines and policies on arm treatment following stroke, and advance stroke rehabilitation.REC name
North West - Greater Manchester West Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
15/NW/0939
Date of REC Opinion
16 Dec 2015
REC opinion
Favourable Opinion