# Lived Experiences of Returning to Participation After Mild Stroke: A Phenomenological Study in Spain

## TL;DR

This study explores how people in Spain return to daily life after a mild stroke, highlighting the role of personal resilience and social support.

## Contribution

The study provides new insights into the lived experiences of mild stroke survivors in a specific socio-cultural context.

## Key findings

- Returning to participation after a mild stroke is a diverse process influenced by personal resilience and autonomy.
- Social support and adaptations play a key role in reintegration into daily life and community activities.
- Self-determination and the development of new post-stroke roles are central to the recovery process.

## Abstract

The process of returning to participation after a stroke depends on various individual and contextual factors, yet little is known about those with slight dependency. This study aimed to explore the experiences of people with mild sequelae after stroke in relation to their return to participation, considering the socio‐cultural context of Spain.

A qualitative phenomenological study was conducted involving 35 mild stroke survivors walking independently. The participants had experienced a stroke at least 6 months earlier. Data collection consisted of semi‐structured interviews and researchers' field notes. The analysis was conducted following Giorgi's method.

Three themes were obtained: (a) Intrapersonal context: resilience to face sequelae and achieve autonomy, self‐reflections; (b) Return to daily life: home and leisure, work and study, daily community and travel; and (c) Interpersonal and social participation reengage: close connections, social bonds.

Our findings suggest that returning to participation after a mild stroke is a highly heterogeneous process and is shaped by social support, adaptations facilitating independence, self‐determination, and the development of post‐stroke roles.

Individuals with lived experience engaged in the analysis and verification of the presented data. Their input helped ensure that the findings were interpreted in a way that reflects real‐world perspectives and relevance. No patient or public involvement occurred during the design or conduct of the study, or in the preparation of the manuscript.