Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Interventions for reducing sedentary behaviour in people with stroke

Information

DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD012996.pub2Copy DOI
Database:
  1. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Version published:
  1. 29 June 2021see what's new
Type:
  1. Intervention
Stage:
  1. Review
Cochrane Editorial Group:
  1. Cochrane Stroke Group

Copyright:
  1. Copyright © 2021 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Article metrics

Altmetric:

Cited by:

Cited 0 times via Crossref Cited-by Linking

Collapse

Authors

  • David H Saunders

    Correspondence to: Physical Activity for Health Research Centre (PAHRC), University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK

    [email protected]

  • Gillian E Mead

    Centre for Clinical Brain Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK

  • Claire Fitzsimons

    Physical Activity for Health Research Centre (PAHRC), University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK

  • Paul Kelly

    Physical Activity for Health Research Centre (PAHRC), University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK

  • Frederike van Wijck

    Institute for Applied Health Research and the School of Health and Life Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, UK

  • Olaf Verschuren

    Rehabilitation Centre de Hoogstraat, Utrecht, Netherlands

  • Karianne Backx

    Institute for Sport, Physical Education and Health Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK

  • Coralie English

    Priority Research Centre for Stroke and Brain Injury, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, Australia

    NHMRC Centre of Research Excellence in Stroke Rehabilitation and Brain Recovery, Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health & Hunter Medical Research Institute, Melbourne and Newcastle, Australia

Contributions of authors

D Saunders
Protocol: design, writing, and editing.
Review: screening studies, extracting data, checking data, risk of bias assessment, analysis, writing and editing.

C Fitzsimons
Protocol: design, writing, and editing.
Review: screening studies, checking data, writing and editing.

P Kelly
Protocol: design, writing, and editing.
Review: screening studies, checking data, writing and editing.

C English
Protocol: design, writing, and editing.
Review: screening studies, writing and editing.

O Verschuren
Protocol: design, writing, and editing.
Review: screening studies, writing and editing.

K Backx
Protocol: Not involved at that stage
Review: screening studies, extracting data, checking data, risk of bias assessment, writing and editing.

F van Wijck
Protocol: design, writing, and editing.
Review: checking data, writing and editing.

GE Mead
Protocol: design, writing, and editing.
Review:screening studies, writing and editing.

Sources of support

Internal sources

  • University of Edinburgh, UK

    Funding from University of Edinburgh to cover input from author Karianne Backx

External sources

  • New Source of support, Other

Declarations of interest

D Saunders: none known.

C Fitzsimons: Grants and contracts: (1) Programme grant to develop and evaluate strategies to reduce sedentary behaviour in patients after stroke and improve outcomes (ongoing until September 2024), National Institute for Health Research, (2) Research grant for a qualitative study to explore sedentary behaviour in stroke survivors and inform intervention development (completed), Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government, (3) Research grant for a feasibility study to explore how to provide feedback and remote monitoring to stroke survivors on their sedentary behaviour (completed), Edinburgh and Lothians Health Foundation.

P Kelly: none known.

C English: Author of one of the included studies (English 2016b) and was not included in screening, data extraction or analysis of the study.

O Verschuren: none known.

K Backx: none known.

F van Wijck: none known.

GE Mead:  Grants and contracts: (1) Grant holder in a study of sedentary behaviour after stroke, Chief Scientist Office, Scottish Government, (2) Grant holder in RECREATE trial, NIHR UK. Royalties or licenses: (1) Course on exercise after stroke, Later life training, (2) Book on physical fitness training after stroke, Elsevier.

Acknowledgements

The review authors acknowledge the assistance of the Cochrane Stroke Group in the preparation of this review and their Information Specialist, Joshua Cheyne, in the design and testing of the search strategy approach.

Parts of the Background and Methods sections of this review include sections of verbatim template text because the approaches used correspond to the protocol of a connected review by some of the same author team investigating physical fitness training interventions after stroke (Saunders 2020). The approach is permitted by The Cochrane Publication Policy.

We are grateful to all the authors of trials who provided supplementary information including unpublished data.

We would be grateful if people who are aware of studies potentially relevant for this review could contact David Saunders.

Version history

Published

Title

Stage

Authors

Version

2021 Jun 29

Interventions for reducing sedentary behaviour in people with stroke

Review

David H Saunders, Gillian E Mead, Claire Fitzsimons, Paul Kelly, Frederike Wijck, Olaf Verschuren, Karianne Backx, Coralie English

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD012996.pub2

2018 Apr 10

Interventions for reducing sedentary behaviour in people with stroke

Protocol

David H Saunders, Gillian E Mead, Claire Fitzsimons, Paul Kelly, Frederike van Wijck, Olaf Verschuren, Coralie English

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD012996

Differences between protocol and review

Expanded the scope of the review to meet the objectives

The objectives were changed to also capture studies examining interventions with the potential to reduce sedentary behaviour as well as those specifically intended to reduce sedentary behaviour.

Search Strategy

The following resources were identified as being redundant by the Cochrane Stroke Group Information Specialist.

Subgroup and sensitivity analyses

The planned subgroup and sensitivity analyses were amended to clarify that they pertain to any eligible outcome measure. 

Keywords

MeSH

PICOs

Population
Intervention
Comparison
Outcome

The PICO model is widely used and taught in evidence-based health care as a strategy for formulating questions and search strategies and for characterizing clinical studies or meta-analyses. PICO stands for four different potential components of a clinical question: Patient, Population or Problem; Intervention; Comparison; Outcome.

See more on using PICO in the Cochrane Handbook.

original image

Figures and Tables -
Figure 1

'Risk of bias' graph: review authors' judgements about each 'Risk of bias' item presented as percentages across all included studies. In studies with no follow‐up measurement, we did not assess risk of bias for the item labelled 'Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias): end of follow‐up'; this results in some blank spaces

Figures and Tables -
Figure 2

'Risk of bias' graph: review authors' judgements about each 'Risk of bias' item presented as percentages across all included studies. In studies with no follow‐up measurement, we did not assess risk of bias for the item labelled 'Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias): end of follow‐up'; this results in some blank spaces

'Risk of bias' summary: review authors' judgements about each 'Risk of bias' item for each included study. In studies with no follow‐up measurement we did not assess risk of bias for the item labelled 'Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias): end of follow‐up'; this results in some blank spaces .

Figures and Tables -
Figure 3

'Risk of bias' summary: review authors' judgements about each 'Risk of bias' item for each included study. In studies with no follow‐up measurement we did not assess risk of bias for the item labelled 'Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias): end of follow‐up'; this results in some blank spaces .

original image

Figures and Tables -
Figure 4

original image

Figures and Tables -
Figure 5

original image

Figures and Tables -
Figure 6

Comparison 1: Interventions versus control at end of intervention, Outcome 1: Death

Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1: Interventions versus control at end of intervention, Outcome 1: Death

Comparison 1: Interventions versus control at end of intervention, Outcome 2: Recurrent cardiovascular or cerebrovascular events

Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1: Interventions versus control at end of intervention, Outcome 2: Recurrent cardiovascular or cerebrovascular events

Comparison 1: Interventions versus control at end of intervention, Outcome 3: Adverse events ‐ falls

Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.3

Comparison 1: Interventions versus control at end of intervention, Outcome 3: Adverse events ‐ falls

Comparison 1: Interventions versus control at end of intervention, Outcome 4: Sedentary behaviour ‐ sitting time hours per day

Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.4

Comparison 1: Interventions versus control at end of intervention, Outcome 4: Sedentary behaviour ‐ sitting time hours per day

Comparison 1: Interventions versus control at end of intervention, Outcome 5: Risk factors ‐ physical activity ‐ MVPA

Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.5

Comparison 1: Interventions versus control at end of intervention, Outcome 5: Risk factors ‐ physical activity ‐ MVPA

Comparison 1: Interventions versus control at end of intervention, Outcome 6: Risk factors ‐ physical activity ‐ step count

Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.6

Comparison 1: Interventions versus control at end of intervention, Outcome 6: Risk factors ‐ physical activity ‐ step count

Comparison 1: Interventions versus control at end of intervention, Outcome 7: Risk factors ‐ anthropometry ‐ Body Mass Index

Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.7

Comparison 1: Interventions versus control at end of intervention, Outcome 7: Risk factors ‐ anthropometry ‐ Body Mass Index

Comparison 1: Interventions versus control at end of intervention, Outcome 8: Risk factors ‐ anthropometry ‐ waist circumference

Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.8

Comparison 1: Interventions versus control at end of intervention, Outcome 8: Risk factors ‐ anthropometry ‐ waist circumference

Comparison 1: Interventions versus control at end of intervention, Outcome 9: Risk factors ‐ blood pressure ‐ systolic

Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.9

Comparison 1: Interventions versus control at end of intervention, Outcome 9: Risk factors ‐ blood pressure ‐ systolic

Comparison 1: Interventions versus control at end of intervention, Outcome 10: Risk factors ‐ blood pressure ‐ diastolic

Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.10

Comparison 1: Interventions versus control at end of intervention, Outcome 10: Risk factors ‐ blood pressure ‐ diastolic

Summary of findings 1. Interventions compared to control at end of intervention

Interventions compared to control at end of intervention for reducing sedentary behaviour in people with stroke

Participants: people with stroke, who participated in an intervention to reduce or fragment sedentary time
Setting: any
Intervention: any intervention designed to reduce or fragment sedentary behaviour with or without usual care
Comparison: no intervention, attention control, sham intervention or adjunct intervention with or without usual care

Outcomes

 

Anticipated absolute effects* (95% CI)

Relative effect
(95% CI)

No of participants
(studies)

Certainty of the evidence
(GRADE)

Comments

Risk with control at end of intervention

Risk with interventions

Death

Analysis 1.1
 

25 per 1,000

30 per 1,000
(13 to 71)

RD 0.00
(‐0.02 to 0.03)

753
(10 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
Lowa, b

Interventions do not increase/reduce death

Recurrent cardiovascular or cerebrovascular events

Analysis 1.2

 

85 per 1,000

101 per 1,000
(42 to 238)

RD ‐0.01
(‐0.04 to 0.01)

753
(10 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
Lowa, b

Interventions do not increase/reduce recurrent cardiovascular or cerebrovascular events

Adverse events

 

Falls

Analysis 1.3

20 per 1,000

23 per 1,000
(10 to 56)

RD 0.00
(‐0.02 to 0.02)

753
(10 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
Lowa, b

Interventions do not increase/reduce the risk of falls

Other

 

Not including falls, there were 51 recorded adverse events in the intervention groups and 50 in the control groups

753
(10 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊕⊝
Moderatea

Interventions do not increase/reduce the number of other adverse events

Although the reporting of this outcome was not always clear, there is a reasonable number of events and these are balanced across the intervention and control groups

Sedentary behaviour (time)

 

 

Time

Analysis 1.4

The mean sedentary behaviour (time) was 9.22 hours/day

MD 0.13 hours/day higher
(0.42 lower to 0.68 higher)

300
(7 RCTs)

⊕⊝⊝⊝
Very lowa, c, d

Interventions do not increase/reduce in sedentary behaviour quantified as sitting time

This outcome combines objectively (weight 74%) and subjectively (weight 26%) assessed data which can underestimate sedentary time

Pattern
 

Effects on reducing prolonged (> 30min) sitting time and effects increasing interruptions to sitting (sit to stand transitions) are inconclusive

188
(3 RCTs)

⊕⊝⊝⊝
Very lowe, f

The data are too few and biased for any conclusions about effects on patterns of sedentary behaviour. The direction of effect is in favour of the control groups in 2 of the 3 studies

*The risk in the intervention group (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).

CI: confidence interval; MD: mean difference; RCT: randomised controlled trial; RD: risk difference 

GRADE Working Group grades of evidence
High certainty: We are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect
Moderate certainty: We are moderately confident in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different
Low certainty: Our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: The true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect
Very low certainty: We have very little confidence in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect

aIndirectness: higher function patients who can stand and walk independently and who can participate in physical activity and exercise may not represent those who are most likely to benefit from interventions to reduce sedentary behaviour

bImprecision: the very low number of events means evidence is downgraded

cOnly one of the two hospitals in LAST 2018 had analysable sedentary time data and there were multiple other risk of bias items which reduce confidence in this measurement.

dOnly LAST 2018 and English 2016b used objectively measured sedentary time; all other studies report subjective data

eThe STARFISH 2018 study is at high risk of bias and the sit to stand data of Wellwood 2004 are biassed through a high proportion of dropouts

fLow number of studies, low number of participants

Figures and Tables -
Summary of findings 1. Interventions compared to control at end of intervention
Table 1. Outcome measures classification

Outcome

Type or domain

Primary outcomes

Death1

Any cause

Recurrent non‐fatal events1

Cardiovascular

Cerebrovascular

Secondary outcomes

Adverse events1

Falls

Sedentary behaviour1

Time

Pattern

Risk factors

Other outcomes

Impairments

Physical fitness

Balance

Activity limitations

Specific

Generic

Participation restriction

Quality of life

Psychosocial

Mood

Fatigue

Cognition

Complications of immobility

1 Outcome categories to be included in the 'Summary of findings' table

Figures and Tables -
Table 1. Outcome measures classification
Table 2. Summary of intervention details for each TIDieR item

Author (year)

(1) Brief name

(2) Why

(3) What: materials

(4) What: procedures

(5) Who provided

(6) How

(7) Where
 

(8) When and how much

(9) Tailoring

(10) Modifications

(11) How well: planned

 

(12) How well: actual

 

English 2016b

Breaking up sitting time with
physical activity

Breaking up sitting time with periods of light intensity physical activity leads to reductions
in cardiovascular disease risk factors and mortality.
Therefore, interventions aimed at reducing daily sitting time
may be a promising new target for reducing recurrent stroke risk

Four counselling sessions with the main message being to sit less
and move more, with encouragement to regularly break up sitting
time with short bursts of light‐intensity activity (standing,
walking at a comfortable pace)
 

Motivational interviewing to elicit behaviour
change.

At the first session, participants were presented
with an individualized written report which provided
feedback regarding daily sedentary time and breaks in sedentary
time based on the baseline hip‐worn accelerometer data. This report was used as the starting point for discussions. The counselling
sessions used key motivational interviewing techniques
(decisional balance sheets, importance and confidence rulers) to
initiate and reinforce change talk. Action plans, goals, and strategies
were elicited from the participants, rather than imposed by the counsellors

The counselling sessions were provided by 2
researchers, both of whom were formally trained in
motivational interviewing techniques through accredited courses

The first session was provided face‐to‐face, follow‐up counselling sessions were delivered by
phone

First face‐to‐face session was delivered at the participant's home

Follow up sessions occurred 1, 3, and 7 weeks after the initial session

Motivational interviewing was used
to strengthen each participant's own motivation and commitment
to change.
At the first session, participants were presented
with an individualized written report which provided
feedback regarding daily sedentary time and breaks in sedentary
time based on the baseline hip‐worn accelerometer data. This
report was used as the starting point for discussions. Action plans, goals, and strategies
were elicited from the participants, rather than imposed by
the counselors

n/a

Feasibility was assessed via adherence to counselling sessions
(actively engaged in all scheduled counselling sessions) and
completion of all assessments at baseline and post intervention,
including activity monitor wear time

There was
100% compliance with counselling sessions (ie, all participants
engaged in all scheduled counselling sessions).

Compliance with wearing the activity monitors was
high. At baseline, 23 and 31 participants had 7 days of valid data
from the activPAL3 and Actigraph monitors, respectively. All
other participants had at least 4 days of wear time for both
monitors, with the exception of 3 participants for whom the
Actigraph monitor did not record any valid data on any days. At
post intervention, 33 and 25 participants had 7 days of valid data
from the activPAL3 and the Actigraph monitors, respectively. All
other participants had at least 4 valid wear days for both the
activPAL3 and Actigraph monitors, with the following exceptions: 2 participants (both in the control group) did not complete the
post intervention assessment for reasons of ill health not related to
the trial, and a further 3 participants did not have any valid wear
days for the Actigraph monitor

Krawcyk 2019
 

Early home‐based high intensity interval training (HIIT)

HIIT offers a low time commitment exercise intervention which could overcome barriers to physical activity, improve fitness and influence risk factors

a) Indoor exercise equipment including  cycle ergometer, rowing machine or stairs

and /or

b) Outdoor exercise access to places in which to walk, run or cycle

c) Exercise catalogue containing various suggested modes of exercise

d) Laminated standardized text passage (cue card) to guide exercise intensity

e) Stop watch to time the exercise intervals

f) Exercise diary to record mode duration and intensity

HIIT was performed 9 minutes per day for 12 weeks at home via a mode(s) of exercise selected from a catalogue.

Participants were encouraged to exercise at a high intensity such that they were unable to speak comfortably

 

The HIIT programme was unsupervised but the trial coordinator was in regular contact
 

a) Trial coordinator provided a talk at baseline which was an education session about lifestyle changes including exercise

b) Trial coordinator  made one home visit to introduce the exercise programme and the talk test (for exercise intensity)

c) Trial coordinator  made weekly telephone calls to check progress

Home and/or outdoors in the community
 

Each session comprised 3 x 3 minutes exercise with 2 minutes active recovery between

Sessions occurred 5 days per week for 12 weeks.

Exercise intensity 77 to 93% maximum heart rate, 14 to 16 on the Borg scale of perceived exertion, not able to speak comfortably.

Exercise intensity progressed by ensuring that participants were not able to speak comfortably.

a) Participants could choose their mode of exercise from among stationary bicycle, brisk walking, stair stepping, outdoor cycling, running, other rehabilitation and indoor rowing. Mode could be alone or in combination.
 

b) Exercise intensity was tailored for each participant

n/a

a) Participants had a
laminated standardized text passage (cue card) to guide exercise intensity.

b) Participants
wore a stop watch to time the 3 minute exercise intervals.

c) Participants kept an exercise diary to record mode duration and intensity.

d) Trial coordinator  made weekly telephone calls to check progress

Participants exercised for an average of 56 out of 60 planned days (93% adherence)

10 of 31 patients (32%) exercised >5 days per week (>100% adherence)

24 of 31 patients (77%) exercised ≥4 days per week (≥80% adherence)

LAST 2018
 
 

Individualised coaching in exercise and physical activity
 

Tailored counselling is known to improve participation in physical activity after stroke
 

a)  a standardized questionnaire to register individual physical activity preferences and list 1 to 3 individual goals

b) outpatient, private, and community‐based treatment
groups, individual physiotherapy, or home training

c) training diary

 

a) Based on the preferences and goals, a schedule
for physical activities and exercise was set for the next month.

b) participants offered access to outpatient, private, and community‐based treatment groups, individual physiotherapy, or home training if preferred

c) participants were trained how to complete the
training diary and record the amount and intensity of each day’s
activities.

d) Training diaries were reviewed, and the schedule was
reassessed according to individual needs, including progression for
the next month.

e)  Monthly Meetings Month 1‐6  face‐to‐face in the participants’
home.
Month 7‐12 alternate home/phone meetings
Month 13‐18
4 phone and 2 home meetings

Physiotherapist
 

Monthly coaching and scheduling by physiotherapist  based on preferences and goals established using the Goal Attainment Scaling approach
 

Home including community based groups and exercise classes
 
 

Exercise; 45–60 minutes per session, 1 day per week for 18 months at an intensity between 15 and 17 on Borg scale of perceived exertion

Physical activity; 30 minutes per day, every day for 18 months
 
 
 
 
 

Individualised coaching involved identification of individual exercise/activity modes and identification of individual goals.

Intensity of exercise was tailored using the Borg scale of perceived exertion

Exercise/physical activity reviewed and reassessed for the next month

n/a
 

Clear RPE guidelines given

Training diary to monitor progress and advise on next phase

 

> 60% of participants complied with 150 min/week physical activity

50 ‐ 57% of participants complied with 45min/week exercise

Average exercise RPE achieved 14.0 ‐ 14.3

Attendance at more than 50% of coaching meetings; 38 ‐ 58% of participants

SPRITE I (arm 1) 2017

Home‐based
cardiac rehabilitation programme modified for stroke

Cardiac rehabilitation benefits mortality and morbidity and home delivery improves adherence. Shared common risk factors mean this intervention may also be beneficial for stroke and TIA

a) 'The Healthy Brain Rehabilitation Manual' containing
information about stroke, setting lifestyle change goals and cardiovascular risk. Content included (smoking, physical and
sexual activity, mental health, community resources (e.g. smoking
cessation support; exercise classes), diet and secondary
prevention medication.

b) Telephone follow‐up involving motivational interviewing based on the  theory of planned behaviour and adopting the ‘5
As’ approach to behaviour change.

c) Guidance on how to achieve moderate
intensity physical activity using the ‘talk/sing test’

Participants were informed of the UK national physical
activity guidelines as well as how to achieve moderate
and vigorous physical activity intensity.

This was explained to participants at baseline assessments, in the manual and during telephone follow‐up
 

Health professional (General
Practitioner)

Healthy Brain Manual and telephone follow‐up support carried out by health professional

Home

'The Healthy Brain Rehabilitation Manual' was provided for 6 weeks

Telephone follow‐up took place in week 1 and week 4

Participants were able to set their own goals

n/a

Strategies to improve fidelity:

Participants provided 'The Healthy Brain Rehabilitation Manual' to refer to

Telephone support provided

100% retention of participants in the study

 SPRITE I (arm 2) 2017
 

Home‐based cardiac rehabilitation programme modified for stroke which is delivered either with pedometer

Cardiac rehabilitation benefits mortality and morbidity and home delivery improves adherence. Shared common risk factors mean this intervention may also be beneficial for stroke and TIA

Use of a pedometer  promotes physical activity by providing feedback and allowing  goal setting and
monitoring of activity levels

a) 'The Healthy Brain Rehabilitation Manual' containing
information about stroke, setting lifestyle change goals and cardiovascular risk. Content included (smoking, physical and
sexual activity, mental health, community resources (e.g. smoking
cessation support; exercise classes), diet and secondary
prevention medication.

b) Telephone follow‐up involving motivational interviewing based on the  theory of planned behaviour and adopting the ‘5
As’ approach to behaviour change.

c) Pedometer device (either Yamax Digi‐Walker CW‐701 or Fitbit Charge) to record daily step count and allow participants to set and monitor
goals to increase their physical activity levels

d) Guidance on how to achieve moderate
intensity physical activity by adopting a cadence of 100 steps/min

Participants were informed of the UK national physical
activity guidelines as well as how to achieve moderate
and vigorous physical activity intensity.

This was explained to participants at baseline assessments, in the manual and during telephone follow‐up.

Encouraged to use pedometers
to set step count targets based on previous week’s self‐reported daily step counts

Health professional (General Practitioner)
 

Healthy Brain Manual and telephone follow‐up support carried out by health professional
 

Home
 

'The Healthy Brain Rehabilitation Manual', with a pedometer, was provided for 6 weeks

Telephone follow‐up took place in week 1 and week 4

Participants were able to set their own goals
 

n/a
 

Strategies to improve fidelity:

Participants provided 'The Healthy Brain Rehabilitation Manual' to refer to

Telephone support provided

Pedometers to keep a daily step count diary

100% retention of participants in the study

Not all participants able to use Fitbit pedometer and changed to the Yamax pedometer instead

SPRITE II (arm 1) 2019
and SPRITE II (arm 2) 2019
 

Home‐based cardiac rehabilitation programme modified for stroke which is delivered either with or without telephone support from either a GP or  stroke nurse

Cardiac rehabilitation benefits mortality and morbidity and home delivery improves adherence. Shared common risk factors mean this intervention may also be beneficial for stroke and TIA
 

a) 'The Healthy Brain Rehabilitation Manual' containing
information about stroke, setting lifestyle change goals and cardiovascular risk. Content included (smoking, physical and
sexual activity, mental health, community resources (e.g. smoking
cessation support; exercise classes), diet and secondary
prevention medication.

b) Telephone follow‐up involving motivational interviewing based on the  theory of planned behaviour and adopting the ‘5
As’ approach to behaviour change.

c) Wrist worn pedometer device (Yamax Digi‐Walker CW‐701) to record daily step count and allow participants to set and monitor
goals to increase their physical activity levels

d) Daily step count and physical activity diary

At baseline participants given 'The Healthy Brain Rehabilitation
Manual', a wrist‐worn pedometer,
 step count and physical activity diary.

At baseline participants were informed about physical activity guidelines and how to achieve moderate and vigorous physical activity intensity, reduce sedentary time, and set and monitor physical activity goals using the pedometer

During weeks 1, 4, and 9 participants were
telephoned to address
any concerns,  report weekly average step
counts and encouraged to set step count targets via
motivational interviewing in standardised format.

Participants were telephoned by either a) GP

b) Stroke Nurse

SPRITE II (arm 1) 2019

Health professional (General Practitioner)

Healthy Brain Manual and telephone follow‐up support carried out by health professional
 
 

Home
 
 

Healthy Brain Rehabilitation Manual, with or without pedometers, was provided for 12 weeks

Telephone follow‐up took place in weeks 1, 4 and 9

Participants were able to set their own goals
 
 

n/a
 

Strategies to improve fidelity:

Participants provided a healthy brain rehabilitation manual to refer to

Participants provided with pedometers and kept a daily step count diary

Telephone support provided

 
 
 

Three participants believed the pedometer under‐counted their steps

Five participants lost their pedometer

One participant discontinued using pedometer due to skin irritation.

1/28 participants dropped out

 

SPRITE II (arm 2) 2019

Health professional (Stroke Nurse)

STARFISH 2018

Increasing physical activity in stroke survivors using STARFISH, an interactive smartphone application: a randomised controlled trial

Stroke survivors are less physically active and have higher sedentary time than healthy matched controls. Low levels of PA and poor cardiovascular fitness are modifiable risk factors for secondary stroke. Novel methods of supporting PA and exercise programmes following stroke should be developed. Mobile devices can provide real‐time feedback, allow individualised content, and facilitate social support

a) Samsung GalaxyTM smartphone containing the STARFISH application. STARFISH uses the in‐built tri‐axial accelerometer of the phone to record the participant’s step count and data is uploaded to the STARFISH server.

b) Literature on post‐stroke PA

 

 

 

 

Each member of the intervention group was given a smartphone. For the first week STARFISH recorded the step count of each participant to calculate the individual step count target for the following week.

At the end of the week the four members of intervention group met with the researcher. At this visit, individualised step count target for each participant was determined. Thereafter individual step targets were reviewed from data on the STARFISH server and updated automatically.

During the intervention period if a participant reached their target on five out of seven days in a week, their target was increased by 5% for the following week to a maximum of 3000 steps above their baseline.

The group met again with the researcher two months after baseline, to discuss progress and address any concerns.

Control group participants received one individual session with the research physiotherapist where they were given literature published by Chest Heart and Stroke Scotland on the recommended PA guidelines, advice on how to take part in physical activity after surviving a stroke event, and the health benefits of PA post‐stroke.

At completion of the trial the control group participants  received a summary of their outcome measures and a pedometer

The researcher

a) Phone with app given at the start 

b) after week 1, group of 4 participants meet to set step count target for each individual in the group

c) after 2 months progress discussion with researcher

d) after 4 months researcher collects phones and 2nd assessment by blinded assessor

Home

App was provided for 4 months

Progress discussion after 2 months

‐ Initial step count target set 10% above individual baseline step count

‐if a participant reached their target on 5/7days their step count target was increased by 5% the following week, up to a maximum increase of 3000 steps above baseline.

‐ if a participant did not reach their target then the next week their target remained unchanged.

‐If all four members of the group reached their daily step count target on 5/7 days then a reward was administered (i.e. a creature was added to the group’s virtual fish tank)

 

n/a

‐ Data uploaded to the server automatically

‐ Meeting at 2 months to discuss progress

‐ Constant feedback via the app

Baseline intervention n= 52 (31 control) 

4 month assessment  n= 49 (21 control)

6 month follow up assessment n= 44 (19 control)

Vanroy 2019

Aerobic cycling plus education, followed by coaching

Improved aerobic fitness should increase activities of daily living and physical activity.
Educational content aimed to stimulate active behaviour
and  compliance with intervention through behaviour change techniques.

Coaching at the end of an aerobic fitness programme should facilitate carry‐over into a more physically active lifestyle. Coaching strategies were
derived from several theoretical backgrounds such as the Trans
theoretical Model of behavior change and the self‐determination
theory
 

Phase 1 of study

a) Stationary cycle ergometer that
enables passive, motor‐assisted or active resistive training (MOTOmed leg trainer)

b) MOTOmed chip card

c) Polar pulse watch and chest strap

d) Educational sessions for patients and relatives or friends

e) Individual 'movement contract' with patient’s
decision about how to continue the training

Phase 1

In addition to usual care the participants performed seated cycle training using the MOTOmed ergometer with the intensity guided by the heart rate monitor and the session recorded on the MOTOmed chip card.

Education sessions were delivered during this phase

Movement contract was set up between researcher and participant

Phase 1

Researcher set up the movement contract

Unclear who delivered the education sessions

Phase 1

The exercise was delivered individually with face‐to‐face supervision by researcher

Education delivered unclear with regard individual/group format

Phase 1

Inpatient rehabilitation centre

 

Phase 1

a) Exercise; 3 times per week for 12 weeks. Training sessions consisted
of 30 minutes of active cycling, progressing from interval (weeks 1‐8) to
continuous (weeks 9‐12) training.

b) Education; information sessions given 4 times for 60 minutes in weeks  3, 6, 8 and 12

Phase 1

Exercise intensity was tailored as it was individualised based on HRR

Movement contract was individualised

Education component not individualised

n/a

Phase 1

To facilitate compliance the sessions were recorded on the MOTOmed cards and a movement contract was agreed

 

No data available reporting compliance, attendance, adherence

Phase 2 of study

a) Visits by researcher

b) Choice of exercise mode

c) Movement contract

d) Means of recording training

Phase 2

a) Participant performed their choice of aerobic exercise and recorded what they did

b) Researcher visited participants to review the intervention and the movement contract.

Several behavioral strategies
were included in the coaching approach: goal setting, discussing
barriers, increasing autonomy, self‐monitoring and social
support, and motivational interviewing

Phase 2

A well‐trained and experienced
physiotherapist was appointed as the coach

Phase 2

Freely chosen exercise could involve some group activity; no face to face exercise delivery by researcher

Review of exercise performed face to face

Phase 2

At home

Phase 2

Exercise; dose not standardised but selected by each participant

Review visits; 1 visit per month for 9 months; time unclear

Phase 2

Training was self chosen

Movement contract was individualised

Review visits were individualised

n/a

Phase 2

To facilitate compliance,  the researcher undertook monthly review visits

No data available reporting compliance, attendance, adherence
 

Wellwood 2004

Doubled dose of physiotherapy

a) Additional inpatient physiotherapy should
speed up the recovery including mobility

b) Specific functional objectives included the
establishment of independent dynamic sitting balance,
standing balance, upper limb function and
walking, and other functional mobility tasks

a) Three rehabilitation units delivering representative
physiotherapy representative of normal approaches 
UK practice

b) Pre‐existing model for physiotherapy treatment schedules

c) Mechanism for recording the structure of delivered therapy

 

 

Physiotherapy delivered was based on outline treatment schedules described by Edwards 1991

Staff included senior and junior qualified
physiotherapists,  occasionally supervised physiotherapy
students

Face to face inpatient rehabilitation delivered during inpatient care.

Trialists considered it impossible to
designate in advance a standard treatment for all
patients but outline treatment schedules were
discussed (based on Edwards et al. 1991) by the trial
management group to ensure consistency of treatment
categories

Three rehabilitation facilities

Intervention comprised an additional 30‐40 minutes contact per day, five days per week

 

Unclear; UK physiotherapy model would include tailoring of elements

n/a

a) Pre‐existing model of treatment schedules used as basis for intervention

b) 1:1 Therapist input

c) Delivered during inpatient care

d) Mechanism to record delivered therapy

Augmented physiotherapy target of 2:1 ratio was not met

Augmented physiotherapy delivery was 1.6:1

Figures and Tables -
Table 2. Summary of intervention details for each TIDieR item
Comparison 1. Interventions versus control at end of intervention

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1.1 Death Show forest plot

10

753

Risk Difference (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.00 [‐0.02, 0.03]

1.2 Recurrent cardiovascular or cerebrovascular events Show forest plot

10

753

Risk Difference (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.01 [‐0.04, 0.01]

1.3 Adverse events ‐ falls Show forest plot

10

753

Risk Difference (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.00 [‐0.02, 0.02]

1.4 Sedentary behaviour ‐ sitting time hours per day Show forest plot

7

300

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.13 [‐0.42, 0.68]

1.5 Risk factors ‐ physical activity ‐ MVPA Show forest plot

3

72

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

5.61 [‐21.32, 32.53]

1.6 Risk factors ‐ physical activity ‐ step count Show forest plot

2

146

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐33.62 [‐1438.07, 1370.83]

1.7 Risk factors ‐ anthropometry ‐ Body Mass Index Show forest plot

6

200

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

1.31 [0.17, 2.45]

1.8 Risk factors ‐ anthropometry ‐ waist circumference Show forest plot

4

54

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.74 [‐7.36, 8.84]

1.9 Risk factors ‐ blood pressure ‐ systolic Show forest plot

6

200

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐5.88 [‐11.95, 0.19]

1.10 Risk factors ‐ blood pressure ‐ diastolic Show forest plot

6

200

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐1.92 [‐4.80, 0.96]

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 1. Interventions versus control at end of intervention