IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0302364.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reducing risk behaviours after stroke: An overview of reviews interrogating primary study data using the Theoretical Domains Framework

Author

Listed:
  • Patricia Hall
  • Maggie Lawrence
  • Thilo Kroll
  • Catherine Blake
  • James Matthews
  • Olive Lennon

Abstract

Background: Lifestyle changes, in addition to preventive medications, optimise stroke secondary prevention. Evidence from systematic reviews support behaviour-change interventions post-stroke to address lifestyle-related risk. However, understanding of the theory-driven mediators that affect behaviour-change post-stroke is lacking. Methods: Electronic databases MEDLINE, Embase, Epistemonikos and Cochrane Library of Systematic Reviews were searched to March 2023 for systematic reviews addressing behaviour-change after stroke. Primary studies from identified systematic reviews were interrogated for evidence supporting theoretically-grounded interventions. Data were synthesized in new meta-analyses examining behaviour-change domains of the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) and secondary prevention outcomes. Results: From 71 identified SRs, 246 primary studies were screened. Only 19 trials (N = 2530 participants) were identified that employed theoretically-grounded interventions and measured associated mediators for behaviour-change. Identified mediators mapped to 5 of 14 possible TDF domains. Trial follow-up ranged between 1–12 months and no studies addressed primary outcomes of recurrent stroke or cardiovascular mortality and/or morbidity. Lifestyle interventions targeting mediators mapped to the TDF Knowledge domain may improve the likelihood of medication adherence (OR 6.08 [2.79, 13.26], I2 = 0%); physical activity participation (OR 2.97 [1.73, 5.12], I2 = 0%) and smoking cessation (OR 10.37 [3.22, 33.39], I2 = 20%) post-stroke, supported by low certainty evidence; Lifestyle interventions targeting mediators mapping to both TDF domains of Knowledge and Beliefs about Consequences may improve medication adherence post-stroke (SMD 0.36 [0.07, 0.64], I2 = 13%, very low certainty evidence); Lifestyle interventions targeting mediators mapped to Beliefs about Capabilities and Emotions domains may modulate low mood post-stroke (SMD -0.70 [-1.28, -0.12], I2 = 81%, low certainty evidence). Conclusion: Limited theory-based research and use of behaviour-change mediators exists within stroke secondary prevention trials. Knowledge, Beliefs about Consequences, and Emotions are the domains which positively influence risk-reducing behaviours post-stroke. Behaviour-change interventions should include these evidence-based constructs known to be effective. Future trials should address cardiovascular outcomes and ensure adequate follow-up time.

Suggested Citation

  • Patricia Hall & Maggie Lawrence & Thilo Kroll & Catherine Blake & James Matthews & Olive Lennon, 2024. "Reducing risk behaviours after stroke: An overview of reviews interrogating primary study data using the Theoretical Domains Framework," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(4), pages 1-25, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0302364
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0302364
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0302364
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0302364&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0302364?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Maggie Lawrence & Jan Pringle & Susan Kerr & Joanne Booth & Lindsay Govan & Nicola J Roberts, 2015. "Multimodal Secondary Prevention Behavioral Interventions for TIA and Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(3), pages 1-25, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      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:pone00:0302364. 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.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.