Exploring perspectives of sedentary behaviour in stroke survivors

  • Research type

    Research Study

  • Full title

    An exploration of the perspectives of sedentary behaviour in stroke survivors with severe mobility disability living at home: A Q-methodological study

  • IRAS ID

    223528

  • Contact name

    Nicola J Cornwall

  • Contact email

    nicola.cornwall@bthft.nhs.uk

  • Sponsor organisation

    University of Leeds

  • Duration of Study in the UK

    1 years, 0 months, 1 days

  • Research summary

    Although stroke survivors who have severe mobility disability have been identified as being more sedentary than other stroke survivors (Tieges et al., 2015), they are often excluded or underrepresented in research studies, especially in relation to sedentary behaviour (English et al., 2014). The detrimental effects of sedentary behaviour on health and well-being are well documented, therefore it is not only important to determine the significance of sedentary behaviour in this population, but also to gain a better understanding of patients’ experiences and perspectives of sedentary behaviour after stroke. This will help to tailor possible future interventions to reduce sedentary behaviour in stroke survivors who have severe mobility disabilities.

    The study is a Q-methodological study, which aims to understand and explore sedentary behaviour from the perspectives of stroke survivors with severe mobility disability, their carers and health care professionals involved in their care. This will be achieved by conducting a Q-methodological study, which will involve recruiting stroke survivors with severe mobility disabilities (unable to stand or walk without the help of at least one person), their carers and health care professionals. It is anticipated that 20 stroke survivors, 20 carers and 20 health care professionals will be recruited to the study. Participants will complete a Q-sort, which will involve rank ordering a set of statements according to participants’ beliefs about sedentary behaviour and movement, whilst commenting in general terms on the reasons why they have placed statements in a particular order.

  • REC name

    Yorkshire & The Humber - Leeds East Research Ethics Committee

  • REC reference

    17/YH/0106

  • Date of REC Opinion

    4 May 2017

  • REC opinion

    Further Information Favourable Opinion