There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.
Abstract
Objective
Unhealthy lifestyle is common among patients with ischemic stroke or TIA. Hence, health‐related
behavior change may be an effective way to reduce stroke recurrence. However, this
is often difficult to carry out successfully. We aimed to explore patients' perspectives
on health‐related behavior change, support in this change, and sustain healthy behavior.
Methods
We conducted a descriptive qualitative study with in‐depth, semistructured interviews
in eighteen patients with recent TIA or ischemic stroke. Interviews addressed barriers,
facilitators, knowledge, and support of health‐related behavior change framed by the
protection motivation theory. All interviews were transcribed and thematically analyzed.
Results
Patients seem unable to adequately appraise their own health‐related behavior. More
than half of the patients were satisfied with their lifestyle and felt no urgency
to change. Self‐efficacy as coping factor was the most important determinant (both
barrier and facilitator). Fear as threat factor was named as facilitator for health‐related
behavior change by half of the patients. Most of the patients did not need support
or already received support in changing health behavior. Patients indicated knowledge,
guidelines, and social support as most needed to support and preserve a healthy lifestyle.
Conclusion
This study suggests that patients with recent TIA or ischemic stroke often do not
have a high intention to change health‐related behavior. The results fit well within
the framework of the protection motivation theory. As many patients seem unable to
adequately appraise their health behaviors, interventions should focus on increasing
knowledge of healthy behavior and improving self‐efficacy and social support.
Abstract
TIA and stroke patients understand what constitutes a healthy lifestyle, but seem
unable to adequately appraise their own health‐related behavior. More than half of
the patients were satisfied with their lifestyle and felt no urgency to change. Self‐efficacy
was the most important determinant for health‐related behavior change and mentioned
both as barrier and as facilitator.
Background The Framework Method is becoming an increasingly popular approach to the management and analysis of qualitative data in health research. However, there is confusion about its potential application and limitations. Discussion The article discusses when it is appropriate to adopt the Framework Method and explains the procedure for using it in multi-disciplinary health research teams, or those that involve clinicians, patients and lay people. The stages of the method are illustrated using examples from a published study. Summary Used effectively, with the leadership of an experienced qualitative researcher, the Framework Method is a systematic and flexible approach to analysing qualitative data and is appropriate for use in research teams even where not all members have previous experience of conducting qualitative research.
A protection motivation theory is proposed that postulates the three crucial components of a fear appeal to be (a) the magnitude of noxiousness of a depicted event; (b) the probability of that event's occurrence; and (c) the efficacy of a protective response. Each of these communication variables initiates corresponding cognitive appraisal processes that mediate attitude change. The proposed conceptualization is a special case of a more comprehensive theoretical schema: expectancy-value theories. Several suggestions are offered for reinterpreting existing data, designing new types of empirical research, and making future studies more comparable. Finally, the principal advantages of protection motivation theory over the rival formulations of Janis and Leventhal are discussed.
This is an open access article under the terms of the
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided
the original work is properly cited.
scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.