Facilitators and barriers to performing dietary behaviors among chronic community-dwelling stroke survivors: A qualitative secondary analysis.
Ryan R Bailey, Miranda Ipsen
PMID 35131215WHAT IT FOUND
Chronic stroke survivors described how hemiparesis, fatigue, and taste changes make grocery shopping and cooking difficult.
They relied on care-partners and adaptive equipment, but this dependence caused frustration. Fear and dissatisfaction led some to stop cooking or dining with others, reducing participation in meaningful daily activities.
Key findings
01Stroke-related impairments such as hemiparesis and changes in vision, appetite, and taste directly limit the ability to shop for, prepare, and eat food.
02Participants used care-partner assistance, adaptive equipment, and activity modification to overcome these barriers, though reliance on others caused feelings of dependency and frustration.
03Negative emotions related to these limitations led to participation restrictions, with survivors avoiding cooking or social dining due to fear, dissatisfaction with food, or embarrassment.
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.
What it does not show
This was a secondary analysis of data collected for a different purpose (adapting a diabetes prevention program), so dietary behaviors were not explicitly explored to saturation. The sample was relatively homogeneous, consisting mostly of White males, which may limit generalizability to other demographic groups. Stroke survivors and care-partners were interviewed together in focus groups, which may have inhibited open sharing of negative feelings about dependency or assistance. The study did not account for age-related disability distinct from stroke-related disability, which may also affect dietary behaviors. Participants were community-dwelling and able to walk at least 150 feet, so findings may not apply to those with more severe mobility impairments or those living in institutions.
Declared interests
The authors declared no conflicts of interest. The study was supported by an N.I.H. grant.
The easy way to misread this
Do not interpret the use of adaptive equipment and care-partner assistance as evidence that these strategies improve health outcomes or dietary quality. The study reports that these supports helped overcome physical barriers but also caused frustration and dependency. It does not show that they led to better nutritional status or reduced stroke recurrence.