Cargando…

Regaining Confidence after Stroke (RCAS): a feasibility randomised controlled trial (RCT)

BACKGROUND: The Regaining Confidence after Stroke (RCAS) course was designed to facilitate adjustment for people with stroke discharged from rehabilitation. The aim of the trial was to evaluate the feasibility of conducting a randomised trial to compare a RCAS course with usual care. The rates feasi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Horne, Jane C., Hooban, Kate E., Lincoln, Nadina B., Logan, Pip A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6657106/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31367463
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40814-019-0480-z
_version_ 1783438745769345024
author Horne, Jane C.
Hooban, Kate E.
Lincoln, Nadina B.
Logan, Pip A.
author_facet Horne, Jane C.
Hooban, Kate E.
Lincoln, Nadina B.
Logan, Pip A.
author_sort Horne, Jane C.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The Regaining Confidence after Stroke (RCAS) course was designed to facilitate adjustment for people with stroke discharged from rehabilitation. The aim of the trial was to evaluate the feasibility of conducting a randomised trial to compare a RCAS course with usual care. The rates feasibility of screening and recruitment, rates of consent and retention, acceptability of outcome measures and the acceptability and fidelity of the intervention were evaluated. METHODS: Participants with stroke were recruited from hospital databases and community services and randomly assigned to the Regaining Confidence after Stroke (RCAS) course or usual care. The course comprised 11 weekly 2-h sessions with six–eight participants, delivered by two rehabilitation assistants. Carers were invited to attend three of the sessions. Sessions were video recorded. A six-item checklist was developed from the manual content. Each item was rated as met, partially met or not met. Fidelity was assumed if > 75% of the criteria were met. Outcomes were assessed three and six months after randomisation. Semi-structured interviews were conducted using open-ended questions to assess the acceptability of the intervention. RESULTS: Of 47 participants (mean age 66.9 years [SD 14.9]; 26 men), 22 were randomly allocated to the intervention and 25 to usual care. Participants attended a mean of 8.2 [SD 2.6] out of 11 sessions. Fidelity outcomes suggested that the content corresponded to the manual but further training of the therapist was needed. Interview findings indicated the intervention was acceptable and considered beneficial. At three months, 35 (78%) participants returned questionnaires and 30 (67%) at six months, but only 38(42%) were fully completed. CONCLUSION: The results support the feasibility of conducting a randomised trial to evaluate the effectiveness of a RCAS course compared to usual care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 36330958 ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s40814-019-0480-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6657106
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-66571062019-07-31 Regaining Confidence after Stroke (RCAS): a feasibility randomised controlled trial (RCT) Horne, Jane C. Hooban, Kate E. Lincoln, Nadina B. Logan, Pip A. Pilot Feasibility Stud Research BACKGROUND: The Regaining Confidence after Stroke (RCAS) course was designed to facilitate adjustment for people with stroke discharged from rehabilitation. The aim of the trial was to evaluate the feasibility of conducting a randomised trial to compare a RCAS course with usual care. The rates feasibility of screening and recruitment, rates of consent and retention, acceptability of outcome measures and the acceptability and fidelity of the intervention were evaluated. METHODS: Participants with stroke were recruited from hospital databases and community services and randomly assigned to the Regaining Confidence after Stroke (RCAS) course or usual care. The course comprised 11 weekly 2-h sessions with six–eight participants, delivered by two rehabilitation assistants. Carers were invited to attend three of the sessions. Sessions were video recorded. A six-item checklist was developed from the manual content. Each item was rated as met, partially met or not met. Fidelity was assumed if > 75% of the criteria were met. Outcomes were assessed three and six months after randomisation. Semi-structured interviews were conducted using open-ended questions to assess the acceptability of the intervention. RESULTS: Of 47 participants (mean age 66.9 years [SD 14.9]; 26 men), 22 were randomly allocated to the intervention and 25 to usual care. Participants attended a mean of 8.2 [SD 2.6] out of 11 sessions. Fidelity outcomes suggested that the content corresponded to the manual but further training of the therapist was needed. Interview findings indicated the intervention was acceptable and considered beneficial. At three months, 35 (78%) participants returned questionnaires and 30 (67%) at six months, but only 38(42%) were fully completed. CONCLUSION: The results support the feasibility of conducting a randomised trial to evaluate the effectiveness of a RCAS course compared to usual care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 36330958 ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s40814-019-0480-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2019-07-25 /pmc/articles/PMC6657106/ /pubmed/31367463 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40814-019-0480-z Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Horne, Jane C.
Hooban, Kate E.
Lincoln, Nadina B.
Logan, Pip A.
Regaining Confidence after Stroke (RCAS): a feasibility randomised controlled trial (RCT)
title Regaining Confidence after Stroke (RCAS): a feasibility randomised controlled trial (RCT)
title_full Regaining Confidence after Stroke (RCAS): a feasibility randomised controlled trial (RCT)
title_fullStr Regaining Confidence after Stroke (RCAS): a feasibility randomised controlled trial (RCT)
title_full_unstemmed Regaining Confidence after Stroke (RCAS): a feasibility randomised controlled trial (RCT)
title_short Regaining Confidence after Stroke (RCAS): a feasibility randomised controlled trial (RCT)
title_sort regaining confidence after stroke (rcas): a feasibility randomised controlled trial (rct)
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6657106/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31367463
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40814-019-0480-z
work_keys_str_mv AT hornejanec regainingconfidenceafterstrokercasafeasibilityrandomisedcontrolledtrialrct
AT hoobankatee regainingconfidenceafterstrokercasafeasibilityrandomisedcontrolledtrialrct
AT lincolnnadinab regainingconfidenceafterstrokercasafeasibilityrandomisedcontrolledtrialrct
AT loganpipa regainingconfidenceafterstrokercasafeasibilityrandomisedcontrolledtrialrct