Background: A high sedentary time is associated with increased mortality risk. Previous studies indicate that replacement of sedentary time with light- and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity attenuates the risk for adverse outcomes and improves cardiovascular risk factors. Patients with cardiovascular disease are more sedentary compared to the general population, while daily time spent sedentary remains high following contemporary cardiac rehabilitation programmes. This clinical trial investigated the effectiveness of a sedentary behaviour intervention as a personalised secondary prevention strategy (SIT LESS) on changes in sedentary time among patients with coronary artery disease participating in cardiac rehabilitation.Methods: Patients were randomised to usual care (n = 104) or SIT LESS (n = 108). Both groups received a comprehensive 12-week centre-based cardiac rehabilitation programme with face-to-face consultations and supervised exercise sessions, whereas SIT LESS participants additionally received a 12-week, nurse-delivered, hybrid behaviour change intervention in combination with a pocket-worn activity tracker connected to a smartphone application to continuously monitor sedentary time. Primary outcome was the change in device-based sedentary time between pre- to post-rehabilitation. Changes in sedentary time characteristics (prevalence of prolonged sedentary bouts and proportion of patients with sedentary time ≥ 9.5 h/day); time spent in light-intensity and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity; step count; quality of life; competencies for self-management; and cardiovascular risk score were assessed as secondary outcomes.Results: Patients (77% male) were 63 ± 10 years and primarily diagnosed with myocardial infarction (78%). Sedentary time decreased in SIT LESS (− 1.6 [− 2.1 to − 1.1] hours/day) and controls (− 1.2 [ ─1.7 to − 0.8]), but between group differences did not reach statistical significance (─0.4 [─1.0 to 0.3]) hours/day). The post-rehabilitation proportion of patients with a sedentary time above the upper limit of normal (≥ 9.5 h/day) was significantly lower in SIT LESSversuscontrols (48%versus72%, baseline-adjusted odds-ratio 0.4 (0.2–0.8)). No differences were observed in the other predefined secondary outcomes.Conclusions: Among patients with coronary artery disease participating in cardiac rehabilitation, SIT LESS did not induce significantly greater reductions in sedentary time compared to controls, but delivery was feasible and a reduced odds of a sedentary time ≥ 9.5 h/day was observed.Trial registration: Netherlands Trial Register: NL9263.Graphical Outcomes of the SIT LESS trial: changes in device-based sedentary time from pre-to post-cardiac rehabilitation (control group) and cardiac rehabilitation + SIT LESS (intervention group). SIT LESS reduced the odds of patients having a sedentary time >9.5 hours/day (upper limit of normal), although the absolute decrease in sedentary time did not significantly differ from controls. SIT LESS appears to be feasible, acceptable and potentially beneficial, but a larger cluster randomised trial is warranted to provide a more accurate estimate of its effects on sedentary time and clinical outcomes. CR: cardiac rehabilitation.

Aim: This meta-analysis aimed to determine the effect of aerobic training, compared to non-aerobic interventions, on vascular and metabolic risk factors for recurrent stroke. Method: This study was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guidelines (PRISMA). Searches were performed in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane library and Cinahl up to May 8^th 2019. Randomized clinical trials evaluating the effect of solely aerobic training on vascular and metabolic risk factors for recurrent stroke were included in a meta-analysis if relevant outcomes were reported in at least two articles. Results: Our search resulted in a total of 7381 hits. Eleven outcomes out of nine articles were included in the meta-analysis. A significant positive effect of aerobic training was found on systolic blood pressure (−3.59 mmHg, 95% CI −6.14 to −1.05) and fasting glucose (−0.12 mmol/l, 95% CI −0.23 to −0.02). The effect on systolic blood pressure further improved when only high-quality studies were included (−4.95 mmHg, 95% CI −8.24 to −1.66). Conclusion: Aerobic training results in a significant positive effect on systolic blood pressure and fasting glucose after stroke when compared to non-aerobic usual care or non-aerobic exercise.

Background and purpose: Deterioration of physical functioning after stroke in the long term is regarded as a major problem. Currently, the relationship between “peoples'” movement behavior patterns (the composition of sedentary behavior and physical activity during waking hours) directly after stroke and the development of physical functioning over time is unknown. Therefore, the objectives of this study were to investigate (1) the course of physical functioning within the first two years after returning home after stroke, and (2) the association between physical functioning and baseline movement behavior patterns. Method: In the longitudinal RISE cohort study, 200 persons with a first-ever stroke discharged to the home-setting were included. Participants’ physical functioning was assessed within three weeks, at six months, and one and two years after discharge using the Stroke Impact Scale (SIS) 3.0 subscale physical and the five-meter walk test (5MWT). Three distinct movement behavior patterns were identified in a previous study at baseline and were used in the current study: (1) sedentary exercisers (sufficiently active and 64% of waking hours sedentary) , (2) sedentary movers’ (inactive and 63% of waking hours sedentary) , and (3) sedentary prolongers (inactive and >78% of waking hours sedentary accumulated in long prolonged bouts) . The association between movement behavior patterns and the course of physical functioning was determined using longitudinal generalized estimating equations analyses. Results: Overall participants’ physical functioning increased between discharge and six months and declined from six months up to two years. Physical functioning remained stable during the first two years after stroke in sedentary exercisers. Physical functioning improved during the first six months after discharge in sedentary movers and sedentary prolongers and deteriorated in the following six months. Only physical functioning (SIS) of sedentary prolongers further declined from one up to two years. A similar pattern was observed in the 5MWT. Conclusion: Movement behavior patterns identified directly after returning home in people with stroke are associated with and are predictive of the course of physical functioning. Highly sedentary and inactive people with stroke have unfavorable outcomes over time than individuals with higher amounts of physical activity.

The aim of this study is to investigate changes in movement behaviors, sedentary behavior and physical activity, and to identify potential movement behavior trajectory subgroups within the first two months after discharge from the hospital to the home setting in first-time stroke patients. A total of 140 participants were included. Within three weeks after discharge, participants received an accelerometer, which they wore continuously for five weeks to objectively measure movement behavior outcomes. The movement behavior outcomes of interest were the mean time spent in sedentary behavior (SB), light physical activity (LPA) and moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA); the mean time spent in MVPA bouts ≥ 10 minutes; and the weighted median sedentary bout. Generalized estimation equation analyses were performed to investigate overall changes in movement behavior outcomes. Latent class growth analyses were performed to identify patient subgroups of movement behavior outcome trajectories. In the first week, the participants spent an average, of 9.22 hours (67.03%) per day in SB, 3.87 hours (27.95%) per day in LPA and 0.70 hours (5.02%) per day in MVPA. Within the entire sample, a small but significant decrease in SB and increase in LPA were found in the first weeks in the home setting. For each movement behavior outcome variable, two or three distinctive subgroup trajectories were found. Although subgroup trajectories for each movement behavior outcome were identified, no relevant changes over time were found. Overall, the majority of stroke survivors are highly sedentary and a substantial part is inactive in the period immediately after discharge from hospital care. Movement behavior outcomes remain fairly stable during this period, although distinctive subgroup trajectories were found for each movement behavior outcome. Future research should investigate whether movement behavior outcomes cluster in patterns.

This study aimed to acquire insight into the decision-making processes of healthcare professionals concerning referral to primary care physiotherapy at the time of discharge from inpatient stroke rehabilitation. A generic qualitative study using an inductive thematic analysis was performed. Semi-structured interviews were conducted following an interview guide. Secondary care centers in the Netherlands: neurology departments of nine hospitals and (geriatric) rehabilitation centers. Nineteen healthcare professionals (physiotherapists, specialist in geriatric medicine, physiatrist, physician assistant) participated in the study. All were involved in the decision for referral to primary care physiotherapy. During the inpatient period, healthcare professionals gather information to form a complete picture of the stroke survivor as a basis for decision-making. The decision on referral is influenced by personal factors and home environment of the stroke survivor, organizational factors within the care setting, and the intuition and feeling of social responsibility of the individual healthcare professional. After inpatient rehabilitation, many elements are considered that may influence referral to primary care physiotherapy. Presently, there is no consensus concerning referrals. The final decision depends on the individual physiotherapist and care setting. Healthcare professionals mentioned the importance of movement behavior, although there is no consensus if secondary prevention is a primary task of the physiotherapist. More research is needed to identify risk factors for functional decline in order to develop a referral policy that addresses primary care physiotherapy to the right group of stroke survivors.

Objective: High amounts of sedentary behavior increase the risk of cardiovascular disease. This study aimed to determine the preliminary effectiveness and feasibility of the RISE intervention to support community-dwelling people with stroke, who are highly sedentary, to reduce and interrupt sedentary time. Additionally, the added value of including participatory support was determined. Methods: A randomized, multiple-baseline study was conducted including 14 participants. All received the RISE intervention, a 15-week blended behavioral intervention in which a primary care physiotherapist provided personalized coaching in the home setting by using behavior-change techniques and the RISE eCoaching system, including an activity monitor and app to provide real time feedback. Half of the participants (randomly allocated) received participatory support from someone from their social network (e.g., partner or close friend) who joined them in the intervention. Preliminary effectiveness was determined with significant changes in total sedentary time and fragmentation (interruption) of sedentary time using a randomization test. Feasibility was assessed by adherence with the intervention protocol, safety, and satisfaction with the intervention. Results: Participants significantly reduced total sedentary time (p = 0.01) by 1.3 h on average and increased their fragmentation (p < 0.01). Subgroup analyses showed significant improvements in both outcomes only in the group with participatory support. Thirteen (92.9%) participants completed the intervention, no related adverse events occurred, and the reported participant satisfaction was sufficient. Conclusions: The RISE intervention appears promising to support people with stroke who are highly sedentary to reduce and interrupt their sedentary time. Participatory support appears to contribute to greater results. Trial registration: ISRCTN international trial registry, 10694741.