4.2 Article

A Nurse-Coached Exercise Program to Increase Muscle Strength, Improve Quality of Life, and Increase Self-Efficacy in People With Tetraplegic Spinal Cord Injuries

Journal

JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE NURSING
Volume 45, Issue 4, Pages E3-E12

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/JNN.0b013e31829863e2

Keywords

muscle strength; nurse-coach; quality of life; self-efficacy; spinal cord injury; tetraplegia

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A nurse-coached exercise intervention for 10 people with tetraplegic spinal cord injuries was conducted over a period of 2 years at an accessible, community-based YMCA using an equipment especially designed for people with mobility issues and neurological deficits. In this single-subject design study, each participant completed three 3-hour exercise sessions a week for over 6 months. The purpose of the study was to determine what effects the program would have on increasing muscle strength, improving quality of life, and increasing self-efficacy after traditional outpatient therapy sessions were no longer available or affordable. The Sheehy Spinal Cord Injury Functional Improvement via Exercise Model was constructed at the conclusion of an unpublished pilot study and was tested in this study. Expectations of the model were that, if a person with a tetraplegic spinal cord injury participated in a coached program of exercise, muscle strength would increase and functional ability would improve, resulting in greater independence, a higher sense of self-efficacy, and a higher quality of life. Study results using a single-subject design of graph-trend analysis showed upward trajectories in muscle strength, quality of life, and self-efficacy in all study participants regardless of the length of time since his or her original injury. The results support the efficacy of this nurse-coached program for people with tetraplegic spinal cord injuries and validate the Sheehy Spinal Cord Injury Functional Improvement via Exercise Model.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available