Do self-management interventions improve self-efficacy and health-related quality of life after stroke? A systematic review

Elizabeth A. Lynch, Katie Nesbitt, Aarti Gulyani, Raymond J. Chan, Niranjan Bidargaddi, Dominique A. Cadilhac, Billie Bonevski, Fiona Jones, Liam P. Allan, Erin Godecke, Rebecca Barnden, Emily Brogan, Thoshenthri Kandasamy, Stacy Larcombe, Lemma N. Bulto, Coralie English

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)
8 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Introduction: Self-management interventions are recommended after stroke in many international guidelines to improve health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Self-efficacy, a person’s confidence in their abilities, is widely considered to underpin individuals’ abilities to self-manage their health. 

Aims: To synthesize evidence on the effectiveness of self-management programs for improving self-efficacy or HRQoL in stroke survivors. 

Summary of Review: The protocol was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42023440168). We searched databases including Medline, Emcare, Scopus, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and trial registries from inception to 13/12/2024. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effect of a self-management intervention to no/another intervention for survivors of stroke on self-efficacy or HRQoL were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration criteria. Meta-analyses for self-efficacy and HRQoL were performed using random effect model. From 13,608 abstracts screened, 44 randomized controlled trials involving 5931 participants were included. Median time post-stroke of recruited participants ranged from 14 days to 3 years. Time required to deliver the interventions ranged from 45 min to 72 h. Self-management interventions in all included trials had multiple components, predominantly education (N = 40, 91%) and goal setting (N = 39, 89%). Interventions were delivered to individual survivors of stroke (N = 18, 41%), groups of survivors (N = 15, 34%), both individual and group delivery to survivors (N = 5, 11%) and individually to survivor-carer dyads (N = 6, 14%). Interventions were delivered entirely face-to-face (N = 28, 64%), entirely by phone or video-conferencing (N = 7, 16%) or a combination of these delivery modes (N = 9, 20%). There was low certainty evidence that self-management programs compared to no intervention did not significantly improve self-efficacy on pooled effect sizes (SMD 0.08, 95%CI -0.02 to 0.18). There was moderate certainty evidence that self-management programs had a marginal significant effect on HRQoL (SMD 0.07, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.13). Limitations to the review include marked variation between included studies in the interventions delivered, and outcome measures used, targeted behaviors and time since stroke. 

Conclusion: Self-management programs varied markedly in content and dose. There is low-certainty evidence that currently designed self-management programs do not significantly improve self-efficacy. There is moderate certainty evidence that self-management programs have a small effect on HRQoL after stroke.

Original languageEnglish
Number of pages15
JournalInternational Journal of Stroke
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 24 Apr 2025

Keywords

  • health-related quality of life
  • self-efficacy
  • self-management
  • Stroke

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Do self-management interventions improve self-efficacy and health-related quality of life after stroke? A systematic review'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this