Thus, the main objective of this study was to document the ethical issues involved in the systematic inclusion of relatives as clients in the rehabilitation process, from three perspectives: that of relatives,

individuals with a first stroke (stroke clients), and health professionals. This paper reports the qualitative data based on these perspectives in five Canadian urban settings. A two-phase qualitative design of a phenomenological orientation was used [20]. Phase 1 consisted of in-depth interviews [21] and [22] with relatives and stroke clients in order to document their perceptions of actual and ideal services received by relatives both in acute care (Time 1) and in in-patient or out-patient rehabilitation (Time 2). Space was allowed to express lived NVP-BGJ398 solubility dmso experience relating to health services as well as individuals perception of relationships with health professionals including how they wished these to be in an ideal world, a world without time or resources constraint. Only those

who actually received formal rehabilitation services were interviewed at both times, four to six weeks following discharge, allowing patients to resume their normal activities and having LGK-974 the necessary hindsight to comment on actual and ideal services. Phase 2 consisted of three focus groups [23], in which results from Phase 1 were discussed with other relatives, stroke clients, and health professionals. The second phase enabled a form of validation of results and analysis with other participants [24] presenting similar characteristics (relatives and stroke-client). It was also decided to hold a focus group with health professionals although they were not individually interviewed to expand meanings and application of results to their clinical reality. This focus group PtdIns(3,4)P2 was planned to be held at the very end of the data collection process. Three populations were targeted by the study: (1) relatives defined as the individual who has shown a presence with the patient since stroke, (2) individuals who have had a first stroke (stroke-clients) and (3) health professionals working with a stroke clientele.

Table 1 illustrates inclusion and exclusion criteria and the diversity sought to maximize the scope of lived experiences. As relatives were recruited by way of approaching stroke-client, we assumed that the diversity of stroke-clients would result in a similar diversity for relatives. Although we did recruit some dyads (relative-patient), this was not an inclusion criterion. Targeted sample size for Phase 1 was 20 in each group with approximately half being referred to rehabilitation for a total of n = 60 interviews to ensure data saturation [22] whereas targeted sample size for focus groups of Phase 2 were 5–7 participants per group [23]. Health professionals were recruited with the help of local on-site research coordinator not involved in the study.