Self-Efficacy, Poststroke Depression, and Rehabilitation Outcomes: Is There a Correlation?
Abstract
Background The sudden live changes of stroke survivors may lead to negative psychological and behavioral outcomes, including anxiety and depressive mood, which may compromise the rehabilitation process. Some personality features, such as self-efficacy, could play an important role in mediating the degree of post-stroke depression. Aim of this study is to investigate the possible correlation between specific psychological dimensions, such as poststroke depression and self-efficacy, and rehabilitation outcomes.Materials and methods Thirty-eight patients, affected by stroke, completed a four-hour-daily training lasting up to 8 weeks, including traditional and robotic-assisted physiotherapy. Patients were assessed at admission (T0) and at the end (T1) of the motor training, by means of the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Scale, the General Self-Efficacy Scale, and the Functional Independent Measure.Results We observed a significant T0-T1 difference in MADRS scores in patients with a better functional recovery (t = 5.76; P < .0001) and higher self-efficacy (t = 4.74; P < .001), but no significant T0-T1 difference in individuals without functional recovery (t = 1.21; P = .239) and low self-efficacy (t = 1.72; P = .103).Conclusions Our study shows that rehabilitation outcomes and self-efficacy may influence mood, but not vice versa. Thus, to potentiate self-efficacy in the rehabilitation setting may help clinicians in obtaining better functional outcomes, including depression reduction.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The level of self-efficacy may influence recovery results, depression occurrence, professional performance, quality of life, PA, daily activities, and mobility after stroke.
“The level of self-efficacy may influence the results of recovery [18], the occurrence of depression [19,20,21], improvement of professional performance [22], quality of life, PA, daily activities [23] and mobility [20] after a stroke.”
From Physical Activity, Psychological and Functional Outcomes in Non-Ambulatory Stroke Patients during Rehabilitation—A Pilot Study (2022) · cites this paper as [21]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 22 · Cited by 64
- Authors
- Torrisi, M., De Cola, M. C., Buda, A., Carioti, L., Scaltrito, M. V., Bramanti, P., Manuli, A., De Luca, R., & Calabrò, R. S.
- Affiliations
- Centro Neurolesi Bonino Pulejo (IT)
- Corresponding author
- Calabrò, Rocco Salvatore
- Venue
- Journal of Stroke and Cerebrovascular Diseases
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2018-11
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 3208-3211
- ISSN
- 1052-3057 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2886233658
- Cited by
- 64
- References
- 22
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 1
- FWCI
- 3.64
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Stroke and Cerebrovascular Diseases (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac Health and Mental Health
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
- Keywords
- self-efficacy, post-stroke depression, stroke rehabilitation, functional recovery, motor training, depression reduction, psychological factors in rehabilitation
- MeSH terms
- Stroke Rehabilitation, Affect, Aged, Depression, Disability Evaluation, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Motor Activity, Surveys and Questionnaires, Robotics, Time Factors, Treatment Outcome, Recovery of Function, Self Efficacy, Stroke, Physical Therapy Modalities
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review