Low physical activity level is a common risk factor for recurrent stroke. Behavior-changing interventions can increase physical activity participation, but face barriers (e.g., home visits or internet access). Low-cost telehealth approaches, like telephone calls and activity monitors, may offer a feasible solution. However, evidence supporting the efficacy of activity monitors to increase physical activity levels post-stroke remains limited. A previous systematic review suggests that integrating these devices into multifaceted behavior change interventions, such as the 5As (Ask, Advise, Assess, Assist, and Arrange) brief intervention from the HEARTS Technical Package, may enhance their effectiveness.

To present preliminary results on the feasibility of implementing the telehealth intervention that combines the 5As brief intervention, as outlined in the HEARTS Technical Package, with the additional use of an activity monitor, compared to a control group receiving only the 5As brief intervention, for increasing physical activity level post-stroke.

A feasibility randomized controlled trial (RCT) with blinded assessment enrolled 24 individuals’ post-stroke (= 6 months), aged = 18 years, inactive, able to walk 10 meters independently, and medically approved for physical activity. Participants were randomized into an experimental group (EG) (n = 12) or a control group (CG) (n = 12). Both groups received the 5As brief intervention outlined in the HEARTS Technical Package (12-weeks), via telephone call, with the EG also using an activity monitor. Outcomes included recruitment feasibility, intervention feasibility (1. retention, 2. attendance, 3. safety, and 4. perceived effectiveness), and physical activity level (assessed with the Human Activity Profile). Descriptive statistics were used for analysis.

The recruitment rate was 38%. For intervention feasibility: 1. retention was 75% in the CG (9/12) and 83% in the EG (10/12); 2. attendance was 97% in the CG and 99% in the EG; 3. no adverse events were reported; 4. perceived effectiveness: in the CG, 55.6% reported feeling "much better" performing routine physical activity, 11.1% "moderately better," and 33.3% "a little better"; in the EG, 30% felt "much better," 20% "moderately better," 40% "a little better," and 10% reported "the same". Physical activity levels (mean ± SD) increased from 37 ± 12 to 49 ± 16 in the CG and from 42 ± 10 to 57 ± 18 in the EG.

Preliminary findings suggest that the intervention is feasible (high retention and attendance rates and no adverse events). Additionally, the proposed telehealth intervention may positively impact physical activity levels post-stroke.

To our knowledge, this is the first study investigating the feasibility of implementing a telephone call-based 5As brief intervention, as outlined in the HEARTS Technical Package, combined with an activity monitor compared to the 5As brief intervention alone. These findings will inform a fully powered RCT. The study addresses key gaps in the literature, including: 1. identifying a theoretically-informed intervention to increase physical activity post-stroke while overcoming barriers such as home visits and internet access; 2. addressing the lack of evidence supporting physical activity monitors for stroke survivors; and 3. exploring the additional effects of integrating activity monitors into multifaceted behavior change interventions to enhance physical activity post-stroke.