Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Review
  • Published:

Perceived effectiveness and mechanisms of community peer-based programmes for Spinal Cord Injuries—a systematic review of qualitative findings

Spinal Cord volume 55, pages 225–234 (2017)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Study design:

Systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative findings.

Objectives:

To establish the perceived effectiveness and mechanisms of community peer-based programmes based on narratives of consumers with spinal cord injury (SCI).

Methods:

Scopus, Academic Search Complete, CINAHL, Health Source, Medline, PsycARTICLES, PsychINFO, SPORTSDiscus and ProQuest were searched for articles published in English between January 1990 and December 2015. Qualitative studies referring to community peer-based interventions were included if most cases had a SCI. The results section of included studies was extracted and entered in NVivo. Data were inductively coded and analysed according to the three phases of Thematic Synthesis.

Results:

The search yielded 1402 unique records, out of which 126 were scrutinised in full. Four studies were appraised based on eight criteria and were finally included in the analysis. Three analytical themes emerged: (1) a unique learning environment created by the right mixture of learning resources, learning processes and a can-do attitude; (2) peer mentors—a unique learning resource with high level of relatedness that eases and empowers participants; and (3) an intervention that responds to important unmet needs and unrealised potential.

Conclusions:

Community peer-based programmes for people with SCI provide individualised training in important life areas, using a variety of learning resources and a plethora of learning processes. The high level of perceived effectiveness suggests that this type of intervention is an important tool of health systems post discharge from initial rehabilitation. Community organisations should be supported with evaluating their programmes through quality research.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. World Health Organization. International Perspectives on Spinal Cord Injury WHO: Geneva, Switzerland. 2013.

  2. Smith M . Efficacy of specialist versus non-specialist management of spinal cord injury within the UK. Spinal Cord 2002; 40: 11–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Tator CH, Duncan EG, Edmonds VE, Lapczak LI, Andrews DF . Neurological recovery, mortality and length of stay after acute spinal cord injury associated with changes in management. Paraplegia 1995; 33: 254.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Parent S, Barchi S, Lebreton M, Casha S, Fehlings MG . The impact of specialized centers of care for spinal cord injury on length of stay, complications, and mortality: a systematic review of the literature. J Neurotrauma 2011; 28: 1363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Divanoglou A, Westgren N, Bjelak S, Levi R . Medical conditions and outcomes at 1 year after acute traumatic spinal cord injury in a Greek and a Swedish region: a prospective, population-based study. Spinal Cord 2010; 48: 470–476.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Divanoglou A, Westgren N, Seiger Å, Hulting C, Levi R . Late mortality during the first year after acute traumatic spinal cord Injury: a prospective, population-based study. J Spinal Cord Med 2010; 33: 117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Devivo MJ . Sir Ludwig Guttmann Lecture: trends in spinal cord injury rehabilitation outcomes from model systems in the United States: 1973–2006. Spinal Cord 2007; 45: 713.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Bloemen-Vrencken JHA, Witte LPD, Post MWM . Follow-up care for persons with spinal cord injury living in the community: a systematic review of interventions and their evaluation. Spinal Cord 2005; 43: 462.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Suddick K, O’Neill A . Reintegration and rehabilitation after spinal cord injury: a small-scale pilot study. Int J Ther Rehab 2009; 16: 535–544.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Cott C . Client-centred rehabilitation: client perspectives. Disabil Rehabil 2004; 26: 1411–1422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Dickson A, Ward R, O’Brien G, Allan D, O’Carroll R . Difficulties adjusting to post-discharge life following a spinal cord injury: an interpretative phenomenological analysis. Psychol Health Med 2011; 16: 463–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Nunnerley JL, Hay-Smith EJC, Dean SG . Leaving a spinal unit and returning to the wider community: an interpretative phenomenological analysis. Disability and Rehabilitation. Disabil Rehabil 2013; 35: 1164–1173.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Craig A, Nicholson Perry K, Guest R, Tran Y, Dezarnaulds A, Hales A et al. Prospective study of the occurrence of psychological disorders and comorbidities after spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2015; 96: 1426–1434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Kennedy P, Sherlock O, Mcclelland M, Short D, Royle J, Wilson C . A multi-centre study of the community needs of people with spinal cord injuries: the first 18 months. Spinal Cord 2009; 48: 15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Dattilo J, Caldwell L, Lee Y, Kleiber DA . Returning to the community with a spinal cord injury: Implications for therapeutic recreation specialists. Ther Recreation J 1998; 32: 13–27.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Craig A, Nicholson Perry K, Guest R, Tran Y, Middleton J . Adjustment following chronic spinal cord injury: determining factors that contribute to social participation. Br J Health Psychol 2015; 20: 807–823.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Sweet SN, Noreau L, Leblond J, Martin Ginis KA . Peer support need fulfillment among adults with spinal cord injury: relationships with participation, life satisfaction and individual characteristics. Disabil Rehabil 2016; 38: 558.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Letts L, Ginis KAM, Colquhoun H, Levac D, Faulkner G, Gorczynski P . Preferred methods and messengers for delivering physical activity information to people with spinal cord injury: a focus group study. Rehabil Psychol 2011; 56: 128–137 10p.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. McAweeney MJ, Forchheimer M, Tate DG . Identifying the unmet independent living needs of persons with spinal cord injury. J Rehabil 1996; 62: 29–34 6p.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Heisler M . Building peer support programs to manage chronic disease: seven models for success. California HealthCare Foundation 2006.

  21. Erwin EJ, Brotherson MJ, Summers JA . Understanding qualitative metasynthesis: issues and opportunities in early childhood intervention research. J Early Interv 2011; 33: 186–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Harris J . Using qualitative research to develop robust effectiveness questions and protocols for Cochrane systematic reviews. 2011. In: Supplementary Guidance for Inclusion of Qualitative Research in Cochrane Systematic Reviews of Interventions [Internet]. Cochrane Collaboration Qualitative Methods Group. Available from: http://cqrmg.cochrane.org/supplemental-handbook-guidance.

  23. Tong A, Flemming K, McInnes E, Oliver S, Craig J . Enhancing transparency in reporting the synthesis of qualitative research: ENTREQ. BMC Med Res Methodol 2012; 12: 181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Thomas J, Harden A . Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol 2008; 8: 45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Barnett-Page E, Thomas J . Methods for the synthesis of qualitative research: a critical review. BMC Med Res Methodol 2009; 9: 59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Sandelowski M, Barroso J . Handbook for Synthesizing Qualitative Research. New York, USA: Springer Publishing Company. 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Creswell JW, Miller DL . Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory into Practice 2000; 39: 124–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Bates MJ . The design of browsing and berrypicking techniques for the online search interface. Online Rev 1989; 13: 407–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Rees R, Oliver K, Woodman J, Thomas J . Children’s Views About Obesity, Body Size, Shape and Weight: a Systematic Review. London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London: University of London, London, UK: EPPI-Centre SSRU, Institute of Education, 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Donabedian A . An Introduction to Quality Assurance in Health Care. New York, USA: Oxford University Press. 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Walsh D, Downe S . Meta‐synthesis method for qualitative research: a literature review. J Adv Nurs 2005; 50: 204–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Ashton-Shaeffer C, Gibson HJ, Autry CE, Hanson CS . Meaning of sport to adults with physical pisabilities: a disability sport camp experiecnce. Sociol Sport J 2001; 18: 95–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Block P, Vanner EA, Keys CB, Rimmer JH, Skeels SE . Project shake-It-up: using health promotion, capacity building and a disability studies framework to increase self efficacy. Disabil Rehabil 2010; 32: 741–754.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Conway T . Exploration of the Experiences and Perceptions of Spinal Cord Injured People who attend Outdoor Recreation Programmes. http://hdl.handle.net/10523/626. University of Otago: Dunedin, New Zealand. 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Standal OF, Jespersen E . Peers as resources for learning: a situated learning approach to adapted physical activity in rehabilitation. Adapt Phys Act Q 2008; 25: 208–227.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Hammell KW . Experience of rehabilitation following spinal cord injury: a meta-synthesis of qualitative findings. Spinal Cord 2007; 45: 260–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Caldwell LL, Dattilo J, Kleiber DA, Lee Y . Perceptions of therapeutic recreation among people with spinal cord injury. Annu Ther Recreation 1994; 5: 13–26 14p.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Goodwin D, Peco J, Ginther N . Hiking excursions for persons with disabilities: experiences of interdependence. Ther Recreation J 2009; 43: 43–55.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Litchke LG, Hodges JS, Schmidt EA, Lloyd LK, Payne E, Russian CJ . Personal meaning of wheelchair rugby participation by five male athletes. Ther Recreation J 2012; 46: 26–41.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Jalovcic D, Pentland W . Telephone peer support program for women with spinal cord injuries. Proceedings of the 9th Congress of European Federation for Research in Rehabilitation, Budapest, Hungary, 26-29 August 2007. Int J Rehabil Res 2007; 30: 73–74 2p.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Perlman D . Project Quila: a case study in community-based rehabilitation. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing 1997, p392.

  42. Craig A, Rodrigues D, Tran Y, Guest R, Bartrop R, Middleton J . Developing an algorithm capable of discriminating depressed mood in people with spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord 2014; 52: 413.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Guest R, Craig A, Tran Y, Middleton J . Factors predicting resilience in people with spinal cord injury during transition from inpatient rehabilitation to the community. Spinal Cord 2015; 53: 682–686.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Bandura A . Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychol Rev 1977; 84: 191–215.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Ryan RM, Deci EL . Self-determination theory and the for intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. Am Psychol 2000; 55: 68–78.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Ryan RM, Deci EL . Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: classic definitions and new directions. Contem Edu Psychol 2000; 25: 54–67.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Deci E, Ryan R . Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior. New York: Springer USA. 1985.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  48. Bandura A . Social cognitive theory: an agentic perspective. Asian J Soc Psychol 1999; 2: 21–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Ginis K, Nigg C, Smith A . Peer-delivered physical activity interventions: an overlooked opportunity for physical activity promotion. Transl Behav Med 2013; 3: 434–443.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Rimmer JH, Riley B, Wang E, Rauworth A, Jurkowski J . Physical activity participation among persons with disabilities: barriers and facilitators. Am J Prev Med 2004; 26: 419–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Dryden DM, Saunders LD, Rowe BH, May LA, Yiannakoulias N, Svenson LW et al. Utilization of health services following spinal cord injury: a 6-year follow-up study. Spinal Cord 2004; 42: 513.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Institute of Medicine (IOM). Evidence-based Medicine and the Changing Nature of Health Care: 2007 IOM Annual Meeting Summary. The National Academies Press: Washington, DC, USA. 2008.

  53. Ginis KAM, Latimer-Cheung A, Corkum S, Ginis S, Anathasopoulos P, Arbour-Nicitopoulos K et al. A case study of a community-university multidisciplinary partnership approach to increasing physical activity participation among people with spinal cord injury. Transl Behav Med 2012; 2: 516–522.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to acknowledge Dr Michele Wolfe, Kenneth Chance-Larsen and Dr Luke Heales for providing editing support at the final stages of the manuscript. We would also like to acknowledge Dr Wendy Madsen for providing advice in the initial steps of this review.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Central Queensland University, School of Human Health and Social Sciences, Physiotherapy Program, North Rockhampton, Australia

    A Divanoglou

  2. Community Medicine and Rehabilitation Department, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden

    A Divanoglou

  3. Alli Opsi, Not-for-profit Organization, Thessaloniki, Greece

    A Divanoglou & M Georgiou

  4. Paphos General Hospital, Paphos, Cyprus

    M Georgiou

Authors
  1. A Divanoglou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M Georgiou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A Divanoglou.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Supplementary Information accompanies this paper on the Spinal Cord website

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Divanoglou, A., Georgiou, M. Perceived effectiveness and mechanisms of community peer-based programmes for Spinal Cord Injuries—a systematic review of qualitative findings. Spinal Cord 55, 225–234 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1038/sc.2016.147

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sc.2016.147

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links