Self-management in adult patients after stroke – a review of self-management programs

Česká verze

Authors: R. Bečvářová ¹; E. Gurková ²
Authors place of work: Ústav ošetřovatelství a porodní asistence LF OU, Ostrava, ČR ¹; Fakulta zdravotníckych odborov, Prešovská univerzita v Prešove, Slovensko ²
Published in the journal: Cesk Slov Neurol N 2026; 89(1): 16-26
Category: Přehledný referát
doi: https://doi.org/10.48095/cccsnn202616

Summary

Aim: The aim of the literature review was to identify existing self-management programs for adults after stroke and to describe their key characteristics, including program content, implementation methods, and tools used to evaluate results. The research question formulated according to the Participants–Phenomenon of Interest–Context (P-PI-Co) framework was: What self-management programs are intended for patients after stroke? Materials and methods: The literature review was based on a narrative synthesis of quantitative studies, which were identified through searches in the APA PsycINFO, Cinahl, Medline, ProQuest Central, SocINDEX and Web of Science databases between April and May 2025. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA 2020) methodological recommendations were used in the preparation of this review study. A total of 912 studies were identified, of which 10 were included in the review: eight randomized controlled trials, one quasi-experimental study, and one interventional cohort study. To assess the quality of the included studies, risk of bias assessment tools were used –⁠ RoB 2 for randomized studies and ROBINS-I for non-randomized studies. Results: The analysis identified 10 quantitative studies focusing on self-management programs for adults after stroke. These programs were designed with regard to the specific needs and settings of these patients. Seven programs were evaluated as effective or promising, particularly in terms of improving self-efficacy, quality of life, and selected clinical outcomes. Conclusion: Self-management programs can be an effective tool for supporting adults after stroke. These programs have the potential to improve coping with the consequences of stroke, overall health, and the patients‘ quality of life.

Keywords:

stroke – rehabilitation – community health services – self-management

Zdroje

1. GBD 2021 Stroke Risk Factor Collaborators. Global, regional, and national burden of stroke and its risk factors, 1990–2021: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021. Lancet Neurol 2024; 23 (10): 973–1003. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422 (24) 00369-7.

2. Owolabi MO, Thrift AG, Mahal A et al. Primary stroke prevention worldwide: translating evidence into action. Lancet Public Health 2022; 7 (1): e74–e85. doi: 10.1016/S2468-2667 (21) 00230-9.

3. Feigin V, Owolabi MO, World Stroke Organization –⁠ Lancet Neurology Commission Stroke Collaboration Group. Pragmatic solutions to reduce the global burden of stroke: a World Stroke Organization-Lancet Neurology Commission. Lancet Neurol 2023; 22 (12): 1160–1206. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422 (23) 00277-6.

4. Norrving B, Barrick J, Davalos A et al. Action plan for stroke in Europe 2018–2030. Eur Stroke J 2018; 3 (4): 309–336. doi: 10.1177/2396987318808719.

5. Lorig K, Laurent D, González V et al. Living a healthy life with chronic conditions: self-management skills for heart disease, arthritis, diabetes, depression, asthma, bronchitis, emphysema and other physical and mental health conditions. 5th ed. Boulder, CO: Bull Publishing Company 2020.

6. Jones F, Postges H, Brimicombe L et al. Building bridges between healthcare professionals, patients and families: a coproduced and integrated approach to self--management support in stroke. NeuroRehabilitation 2016; 39 (4): 471–480. doi: 10.3233/NRE-161379.

7. Wolf TJ, Baum CM, Lee D et al. The Development of the Improving Participation after Stroke Self-Management Program (IPASS): an exploratory randomized clinical study. Top Stroke Rehabil 2016; 23 (4): 284–292. doi: 10.1080/10749357.2016.1155278.

8. Gurková E. Nemocný a chronické onemocnění: edukace, motivace a opora pacienta. Praha: Grada 2017.

9. Bandura A. Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychol Rev 1977; 84 (2): 191–215. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191.

10. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. PLoS Medicine 2021; 18 (3): e1003583. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003583.

11. Messina R, Dallolio L, Fugazzaro S et al. The Look After Yourself (LAY) intervention to improve self-management in stroke survivors: Results from a quasi-experimental study. Patient Educ Couns 2020; 103 (6): 1191–1200. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2020.01.004.

12. Jones F, Gage H, Drummond A et al. Feasibility study of an integrated stroke self-management programme: a cluster-randomised controlled trial. BMJ Open 2016; 6: e008900. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015 -⁠ 008900.

13. Kamoen O, Maqueda V, Yperzeele L et al. Stroke coach: a pilot study of a personal digital coaching program for patients after ischemic stroke. Acta Neurol Belg 2020; 120 : 91–97. doi: 10.1007/s13760-019-01218-z.

14. Li Z, Lei Y, Bui Q et al. A digital intervention to promote self-management self-efficacy among community-dwelling individuals with stroke: pilot randomized controlled trial. JMIR Rehabil Assist Technol 2024; 11: e50863. doi: 10.2196/50863.

15. Lo HS, Chang AM, Chau JP. Stroke self-management support improves survivors’ self-efficacy and outcome expectation of self-management behaviors. Stroke 2018; 49 : 758–760. doi: 10.1161/strokeaha.117.019437.

16. Lo SHS, Chau JPC, Choi KC et al. Health professional and volunteer-partnered self-management support (COMBO-KEY) to promote self-efficacy and self-management behaviors in people with stroke: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Behav Med 2023; 57 (10): 866–876. doi: 10.1093/abm/kaad028.

17. Mullis R, Aquino MRJ, Kreit E et al. Developing primary care services for stroke survivors: the Improving Primary Care After Stroke (IPCAS) research programme. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research 2024; 1–94. doi: 10.3310/ayhw3622.

18. Towfighi A, Cheng EM, Ayala-Rivera M et al. Effect of a coordinated community and chronic care model team intervention vs usual care on systolic blood pressure in patients with stroke or transient ischemic attack: the SUCCEED randomized clinical trial. JAMA Netw Open 2021; 4 (2): e2036227. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.36227.

19. Chen L, Chen Y, Chen X et al. Longitudinal study of effectiveness of a patient-centered self-management empowerment intervention during predischarge planning on stroke survivors. Worldviews Evid Based Nurs 2018; 15 (3): 197–205. doi: 10.1111/wvn.12295.

20. Sterne JAC, Savović J, Page MJ et al. RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ 2019; 366: l4898. doi: 10.1136/bmj.l4898.

21. Sterne JAC, Hernán MA, Reeves BC et al. ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. BMJ 2016; 355: i4919. doi: 10.1136/bmj.i4919.

22. Jones F, Partridge C, Reid F et al. The Stroke Self-Efficacy Questionnaire: measuring individual confidence in functional performance after stroke. J Nurs 2008; 17 (2): 244–252.

23. Almalki F, El-Fiky A, Almalki M et al. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Arabic version of stroke self-efficacy questionnaire for patients with stroke. Top Stroke Rehabil 2022; 30 : 833–841. doi: 10.1080/10749357.2022.2152171.

24. Chirap-Mitulschi I, Antoniu SA, Ignat B et al. Stroke self-efficacy questionnaire (SSEQ), a reliable measure of disease burden: psychometric validation of the Romanian version. Balneo Prm Res J 2023; 14 (4): 1–11. doi: 10.12680/balneo.2023.620.

25. Klockar E, Kylén M, McCarthy L et al. The Swedish Stroke Self-Efficacy Questionnaire: translation and cross-cultural adaptation. J Patient Rep Outcomes 2024; 8 (1): 55. doi: 10.1186/s41687-024-00735-7.

26. Fryer CE, Luker JA, McDonnell MN et al. Self management programmes for quality of life in people with stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016; 8: CD010442. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010442.pub2.

27. Lynch EA, Nesbitt K, Gulyani A et al. Do self-management interventions improve self-efficacy and health-related quality of life after stroke? A systematic review. Int J Stroke 2025; 20 (7): 786–800. doi: 10.1177/17474930251340286.

28. Lorig KR, Sobel DS, Stewart AL 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. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199901000-00003.

29. Kerari A, Bahari G, Alharbi K et al. The effectiveness of the chronic disease self-management program in improving patients‘ self-efficacy and health-related behaviors: a quasi-experimental study. Healthcare (Basel) 2024; 12 (7): 778–789. doi: 10.3390/healthcare12070778.

30. Jones F, Riazi A. Self-efficacy and self-management after stroke: a systematic review. Disabil Rehabil 2011; 33 (10): 797–810. doi: 10.3109/09638288.2010.511415.

31. Kidd L, Brown J, Mason H et al. A realist evaluation of mechanisms and contexts for facilitating the implementation of supported self-management in community stroke care (The IMPETUS Study). Health 2024; 2024 : 1–22. doi: 10.1155/2024/9198768.

32. Lo SHS, Chau JPC, Lam SKY et al. Association between participation self-efficacy and participation in stroke survivors. BMC Neurol 2022; 22 (1): 361. doi: 10.1186/s12883-022-02883-z.

33. Winstein CJ, Stein J, Arena R et al. Guidelines for adult stroke rehabilitation and recovery: a guideline for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke 2016; 47 (6): e98–e169. doi: 10.1161/STR.00000000000 00098.

34. Zhou X, Du M, Hu Y et al. The effect of self-management programs on post-stroke social participation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Rehabil 2022; 36 (9): 1141–1152. doi: 10.1177/026921552210 95477.

35. Sun X, Ding J, Dong Y et al. A survey of technologies facilitating home and community-based stroke rehabilitation. Int J Hum Comput Interact 2023; 39 (5): 1016–1042. doi: 10.1080/10447318.2022.2050545.

36. Endalamaw A, Zewdie A, Wolka E et al. A scoping review of digital health technologies in multimorbidity management: mechanisms, outcomes, challenges, and strategies. BMC Health Serv Res 2025; 25 (1): 1–16. doi: 10.1186/s12913-025-12548-5.

37. Oh SS, Kim KA, Kim M et al. Measurement of digital literacy among older adults: systematic review. J Med Internet Res 2021; 23 (2): e26145. doi: 10.2196/ 26145.

38. Hall AK, Cole-Lewis H, Bernhardt JM. Mobile text messaging for health: a systematic review of reviews. Annu Rev Public Health 2015; 36 : 393–415. doi: 10.1146/annurev-publhealth-031914-122855.

39. Calderon Martinez E, Zachariah Saji S, Salazar Ore JV et al. Text messages as a tool to improve cardiovascular disease risk factors control: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. BMC Public Health 2025; 25 (1): 1–22. doi: 10.1186/s12889-025-21818-0.

40. Clark E, Jones F, Maccrosain A et al. The key features and role of peer support within group self-management interventions for stroke? A systematic review. Disabil Rehabil 2018; 42 : 307–316. doi: 10.1080/09638288.2018. 1498544.

41. Boot E, Ekker MS, Putaala J et al. Ischaemic stroke in young adults: a global perspective. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2020; 91 (4): 411–417. doi: 10.1136/jnnp-2019-322424.

42. Ekker MS, Boot E, Singhal AB et al. Epidemiology, aetiology, and management of ischaemic stroke in young adults. Lancet Neurol 2018; 17 (9): 790–801. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422 (18) 30233-3.

43. Doshi K, Henderson SL, Seah DJL et al. Stroke survivors’ preferences for post-stroke self-management programs: A discrete choice experiment. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis 2023; 32 (3): 106993. doi: 10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2023.106993.