Objective This study aims to identify determinants of dietary behaviour in wheelchair users with spinal cord injury or lower limb amputation, from the perspectives of both wheelchair users and rehabilitation professionals. The findings should contribute to the field of health promotion programs for wheelchair users. Methods Five focus groups were held with wheelchair users (n = 25), and two with rehabilitation professionals (n = 11). A thematic approach was used for data analysis in which the determinants were categorized using an integrated International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health and Attitude, Social influence and self-Efficacy model. Results Reported personal factors influencing dietary behaviour in wheelchair users were knowledge, boredom, fatigue, stage of life, habits, appetite, self-control, multiple lifestyle problems, intrinsic motivation, goal setting, monitoring, risk perception, positive experiences, suffering, action planning, health condition, function impairments, attitude and self-efficacy. Reported environmental factors influencing dietary behaviour in wheelchair users were unadjusted kitchens, monitoring difficulties, eating out, costs, unfavourable food supply, nutrition education/counselling, access to simple healthy recipes, eating together, cooking for others, and awareness and support of family and friends. Conclusions Important modifiable determinants of dietary behaviour in wheelchair users that might be influenced in lifestyle interventions are knowledge, fatigue, habits, self-control, intrinsic motivation, risk perception, attitude and self-efficacy. It is recommended to involve relatives, since they appear to significantly influence dietary behaviour.
Objective: To evaluate the delivery, acceptance and experiences regarding a traditional and teletreatment approach to mirror therapy as delivered in a randomized controlled trial. Design: Mixed methods, prospective study. Setting: Rehabilitation centres, hospital and private practices. Subjects: Adult patients with phantom pain following lower limb amputation and their treating physical and occupational therapists. Interventions: All patients received 4 weeks of traditional mirror therapy (n=51), followed by 6 weeks of teletreatment (n=26) or 6 weeks of self-delivered mirror therapy (n=25). Main measures: Patient files, therapist logs, log files teletreatment, acceptance questionnaire and interviews with patients and their therapists. Results: In all, 51 patients and 10 therapists participated in the process evaluation. Only 16 patients (31%) received traditional mirror therapy according to the clinical framework during the first 4 weeks. Between weeks 5 and 10, the teletreatment was used by 14 patients (56%) with sufficient dose. Teletreatment usage decreased from a median number of 31 (weeks 5–10) to 19 sessions (weeks 11–24). Satisfactory teletreatment user acceptance rates were found with patients demonstrating higher scores (e.g. regarding the usefulness to control pain) than therapists. Potential barriers for implementation of the teletreatment perceived by patients and therapists were related to insufficient training and support as well as the frequency of technical problems. Conclusion: Traditional mirror therapy and the teletreatment were not delivered as intended in the majority of patients. Implementation of the teletreatment in daily routines was challenging, and more research is needed to evaluate user characteristics that influence adherence and how technology features can be optimized to develop tailored implementation strategies.
Purpose: To gain insight into determinants of physical activity in wheelchair users with spinal cord injury or lower limb amputation, from the perspective of both wheelchair users and rehabilitation professionals. Methods: Seven focus groups were conducted: five with wheelchair users (n = 25) and two with rehabilitation professionals (n = 11). The transcripts were analysed using a sequential coding strategy, in which the reported determinants of physical activity were categorized using the Physical Activity for people with a Disability (PAD) model. Results: Reported personal determinants of physical activity were age, general health status, stage of life, demotivation due to difficulty burning calories, available time and energy, balance in daily life, attitude, and history of a physically active lifestyle. Reported environmental determinants were professional guidance, inconvenient exercise times, accessibility of facilities, costs, transportation difficulties, equipment difficulties, and social support. Conclusions: Important, changeable determinants of physical activity that might be influenced in future lifestyle interventions for wheelchair users are: balance in daily life leading to more time and energy to exercise, attitude towards physical activity, professional guidance, accessibility of facilities (providing information on how and where to find accessible facilities), and social support (learning how to get this).Implications for rehabilitation A physically active lifestyle improves everyday functioning, and decreases disability and the risk of secondary health problems in wheelchair users with spinal cord injury or lower limb amputation.After inpatient rehabilitation, it is difficult for wheelchair users to maintain or further enhance their physical activity, a lifestyle intervention can help them in this.To be effective, lifestyle interventions should address important, changeable determinants of physical activity. Important, changeable determinants of physical activity reported by wheelchair users and rehabilitation professionals are: balance in daily life leading to more time and energy to exercise, attitude towards physical activity, professional guidance, accessibility of facilities, and social support.
