PTOTSLPPilotPhysiotherapy research international : the journal for researchers and clinicians in physical therapy2025

A Home-Based Behaviour Change Intervention With Sedentary Behaviour and Physical Activity in People With Stroke and Diabetes-A Feasibility and Safety Study.

Stefan Sjørslev Ndene-Bodilsen, Mette Aadahl, Trine Hørmann Thomsen and 1 others

PMID 40088479

WHAT IT FOUND

Fourteen stroke survivors with diabetes completed a 12-week home-based behaviour change programme.

Recruitment was slow, questionnaire completion was low, and no efficacy claims can be made from this safety and feasibility test.

Key findings

01The intervention was feasible for delivery and safety, but recruitment was slow and self-reported questionnaire completion was poor.

02Adverse events including falls occurred but were considered unrelated to the intervention itself.

03Because there was no control group, changes in sedentary time or activity cannot be attributed to the intervention.

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTsWhat it means for SLPs

Read the rest of this summary

You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.

Already have one?

What it does not show

The study had no control group, so it is impossible to know if any changes in activity were due to the intervention or natural recovery. The sample size was very small (n=14), limiting generalizability. Recruitment was extremely slow, with only 14 participants completing the study out of 698 screened. Self-reported measures like quality of life and self-efficacy had very low completion rates, making those data unreliable. Participants had relatively mild strokes (median mRS 1), so results may not apply to those with more severe disability.

Declared interests

No specific funding sources or conflicts of interest were declared in the provided text.

The easy way to misread this

Do not interpret the observed changes in sedentary time or step counts as evidence that the intervention works. The study had no control group, and the authors explicitly state that changes could not be attributed to the intervention alone.

Read it on PubMed →