Approaches to influencing leisure participation following stroke: A scoping review.

IF 2.9 3区 医学 Q1 REHABILITATION
Kathryn Jarvis, Matthew J Reeves, Joanna Harrison, Cath Harris, Zain Patel, Katie Cairns, Catherine E Lightbody, Caroline Watkins
{"title":"Approaches to influencing leisure participation following stroke: A scoping review.","authors":"Kathryn Jarvis, Matthew J Reeves, Joanna Harrison, Cath Harris, Zain Patel, Katie Cairns, Catherine E Lightbody, Caroline Watkins","doi":"10.1177/02692155261474051","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>ObjectiveTo review the extent of the available evidence, and to identify and describe the approaches that have been used to facilitate leisure participation following stroke.Data sourcesEmbase, Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL, AMED and Cochrane Library were searched between 1989 and June 2026 for studies (quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods) reporting an intervention that addressed leisure and measured the impact on post-stroke leisure participation.Review methodsEstablished scoping review methods guided data extraction with a piloted data charting tool, appraisal utilising Quality Assessment for Diverse Studies (QuADS), and meta-narrative (quantitative findings) and meta-aggregation (qualitative findings) synthesised using a Convergent Segregated Approach.ResultsWe included 28 studies (2588 participants). Most interventions to address leisure participation were face-to-face (93%) and delivered in the community (82%). Interventions were diverse and heterogeneous; however, 8/28 incorporated leisure education/counselling. Quantitative studies reported 12 distinct measures of leisure participation. A positive impact on leisure participation was reported in 13/22 studies reporting quantitative findings and 8/8 studies reporting qualitative findings. Studies were limited by poor reporting of delivery, 'dose' and methodological quality.ConclusionFuture research needs to explore the role of leisure education/counselling, recognise the importance of motivation, social connectedness and hope, and address barriers to leisure participation. Leisure interventions should be co-created with people that have lived experience of stroke. Programme theory, core components of the intervention and delivery methods must be clearly articulated to enable replication. Future studies should capture psychosocial outcomes alongside leisure participation and satisfaction, and assess long-term impact of interventions.</p>","PeriodicalId":10441,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Rehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":"2692155261474051"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02692155261474051","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ObjectiveTo review the extent of the available evidence, and to identify and describe the approaches that have been used to facilitate leisure participation following stroke.Data sourcesEmbase, Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL, AMED and Cochrane Library were searched between 1989 and June 2026 for studies (quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods) reporting an intervention that addressed leisure and measured the impact on post-stroke leisure participation.Review methodsEstablished scoping review methods guided data extraction with a piloted data charting tool, appraisal utilising Quality Assessment for Diverse Studies (QuADS), and meta-narrative (quantitative findings) and meta-aggregation (qualitative findings) synthesised using a Convergent Segregated Approach.ResultsWe included 28 studies (2588 participants). Most interventions to address leisure participation were face-to-face (93%) and delivered in the community (82%). Interventions were diverse and heterogeneous; however, 8/28 incorporated leisure education/counselling. Quantitative studies reported 12 distinct measures of leisure participation. A positive impact on leisure participation was reported in 13/22 studies reporting quantitative findings and 8/8 studies reporting qualitative findings. Studies were limited by poor reporting of delivery, 'dose' and methodological quality.ConclusionFuture research needs to explore the role of leisure education/counselling, recognise the importance of motivation, social connectedness and hope, and address barriers to leisure participation. Leisure interventions should be co-created with people that have lived experience of stroke. Programme theory, core components of the intervention and delivery methods must be clearly articulated to enable replication. Future studies should capture psychosocial outcomes alongside leisure participation and satisfaction, and assess long-term impact of interventions.

影响中风后休闲参与的方法:范围综述。
目的回顾现有证据的程度,并确定和描述已用于促进中风后休闲参与的方法。数据来源:embase, Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL, AMED和Cochrane图书馆在1989年至2026年6月期间检索了有关休闲干预的研究(定量、定性和混合方法),并测量了对卒中后休闲参与的影响。已建立的范围界定审查方法指导数据提取,使用试点数据图表工具,利用多样性研究质量评估(QuADS)进行评估,以及使用聚合分离方法综合元叙述(定量结果)和元聚合(定性结果)。结果纳入28项研究(2588名受试者)。大多数解决休闲参与的干预措施是面对面的(93%)和在社区提供的(82%)。干预措施是多样化和异质性的;然而,8/28包含休闲教育/咨询。定量研究报告了12种不同的休闲参与方式。有13/22的研究报告了定量结果,8/8的研究报告了定性结果,报告了休闲参与的积极影响。研究受到递送、“剂量”和方法学质量报告不佳的限制。结论未来的研究需要探索休闲教育/咨询的作用,认识到动机、社会联系和希望的重要性,并解决休闲参与的障碍。休闲干预应与有中风经历的人共同创造。规划理论、干预措施的核心组成部分和执行方法必须明确阐明,以便能够复制。未来的研究应该在休闲参与和满意度的同时捕捉社会心理结果,并评估干预措施的长期影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Clinical Rehabilitation
Clinical Rehabilitation 医学-康复医学
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
6.70%
发文量
117
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Clinical Rehabilitation covering the whole field of disability and rehabilitation, this peer-reviewed journal publishes research and discussion articles and acts as a forum for the international dissemination and exchange of information amongst the large number of professionals involved in rehabilitation. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书