IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0192533.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Stroke survivors' and informal caregivers' experiences of primary care and community healthcare services – A systematic review and meta-ethnography

Author

Listed:
  • Dominika M Pindus
  • Ricky Mullis
  • Lisa Lim
  • Ian Wellwood
  • A Viona Rundell
  • Noor Azah Abd Aziz
  • Jonathan Mant

Abstract

Objective: To describe and explain stroke survivors and informal caregivers’ experiences of primary care and community healthcare services. To offer potential solutions for how negative experiences could be addressed by healthcare services. Design: Systematic review and meta-ethnography. Data sources: Medline, CINAHL, Embase and PsycINFO databases (literature searched until May 2015, published studies ranged from 1996 to 2015). Eligibility criteria: Primary qualitative studies focused on adult community-dwelling stroke survivors’ and/or informal caregivers’ experiences of primary care and/or community healthcare services. Data synthesis: A set of common second order constructs (original authors’ interpretations of participants’ experiences) were identified across the studies and used to develop a novel integrative account of the data (third order constructs). Study quality was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist. Relevance was assessed using Dixon-Woods’ criteria. Results: 51 studies (including 168 stroke survivors and 328 caregivers) were synthesised. We developed three inter-dependent third order constructs: (1) marginalisation of stroke survivors and caregivers by healthcare services, (2) passivity versus proactivity in the relationship between health services and the patient/caregiver dyad, and (3) fluidity of stroke related needs for both patient and caregiver. Issues of continuity of care, limitations in access to services and inadequate information provision drove perceptions of marginalisation and passivity of services for both patients and caregivers. Fluidity was apparent through changing information needs and psychological adaptation to living with long-term consequences of stroke. Limitations: Potential limitations of qualitative research such as limited generalisability and inability to provide firm answers are offset by the consistency of the findings across a range of countries and healthcare systems. Conclusions: Stroke survivors and caregivers feel abandoned because they have become marginalised by services and they do not have the knowledge or skills to re-engage. This can be addressed by: (1) increasing stroke specific health literacy by targeted and timely information provision, and (2) improving continuity of care between specialist and generalist services. Systematic review registration number: PROSPERO 2015:CRD42015026602

Suggested Citation

  • Dominika M Pindus & Ricky Mullis & Lisa Lim & Ian Wellwood & A Viona Rundell & Noor Azah Abd Aziz & Jonathan Mant, 2018. "Stroke survivors' and informal caregivers' experiences of primary care and community healthcare services – A systematic review and meta-ethnography," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(2), pages 1-23, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0192533
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0192533
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0192533
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0192533&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0192533?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0192533. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.