Cognitive Reserve Modifies the Relationship Between Neural Function, Neural Injury and Upper-Limb Recovery After Stroke.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether cognitive reserve modifies the relationship between functional connectivity, lesion volume, stroke severity and upper-limb motor impairment and recovery in stroke survivors. METHODS: Ten patients with first-ever ischemic middle cerebral artery stroke completed the Cognitive Reserve Index Questionnaire at baseline. Upper-limb motor impairment and functional connectivity were assessed using the Fugl-Meyer Assessment and electroencephalography respectively at baseline and 3-months post-stroke. A debiased weighted phase lag index was computed to estimate functional connectivity between electrodes. Partial least squares (PLS) regression identified a connectivity model that maximally predicted variance in the degree of upper-limb impairment. Regression models were generated to determine whether cognitive reserve modified the relationship between neural function (functional connectivity), neural injury (lesion volume), stroke severity (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale) and upper-limb motor impairment at baseline and recovery at 3-months (Fugl-Meyer Assessment). RESULTS: The addition of cognitive reserve to a regression model with a dependent variable of upper-limb motor recovery and independent variables of functional connectivity between the ipsilesional motor cortex and parietal cortex, stroke severity and lesion volume improved model efficiency (∆BIC=-7.07) despite not reaching statistical significance (R2=0.90, p=0.07). Cognitive reserve did not appear to improve regression models examining motor impairment at baseline. CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary observations suggest cognitive reserve might modify the relationship between neural function, neural injury, stroke severity and upper-limb motor recovery. Further investigation of cognitive reserve in motor recovery post-stroke appears warranted.

Access to rehabilitation for patients with stroke in Australia.

OBJECTIVE: To identify factors associated with receiving acute goal-directed treatment, being assessed for ongoing rehabilitation, and receiving post-acute rehabilitation after having a stroke. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of National Stroke Audit data for patients with acute stroke treated at Australian hospitals during 1 September 2014 - 28 February 2015. SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: 112 Australian hospitals that admit adults with acute stroke. MAIN OUTCOMES: Associations between patient-related and organisational factors and the provision of rehabilitation interventions. RESULTS: Data for 3462 patients were eligible for analysis; their median age was 74 years, 1962 (57%) were men, and 2470 (71%) had received care in a stroke unit. 2505 patients (72%) received goal-directed treatment during their acute admission; it was not provided to 364 patients (10.5%) who were responsive, had not fully recovered, and did not refuse treatment. Factors associated with higher odds of receiving goal-directed treatment included goal-setting with the patient and their family (odds ratio [OR], 6.75; 95% CI, 5.07-8.90) and receiving care in a stroke unit (OR, 2.08; 95% CI, 1.61-2.70). 1358 patients (39%) underwent further rehabilitation after discharge from acute care; factors associated with receiving post-acute rehabilitation included care in a stroke unit (OR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.34-2.22) and having an arm or speech deficit. Dementia was associated with lower odds of receiving acute goal-directed treatment (OR, 0.49; 95%, 0.33-0.73) and post-acute rehabilitation (OR, 0.43; 95%, 0.30-0.61). CONCLUSIONS: Access to stroke units and to early and ongoing rehabilitation for patients after stroke can be improved in Australia, both to optimise outcomes and to reduce the burden of care on underresourced community and primary care providers.

The evidence for services to avoid or delay residential aged care admission: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Interventions that enable people to remain in their own home as they age are of interest to stakeholders, yet detailed information on effective interventions is scarce. Our objective was to systematically search and synthesise evidence for the effectiveness of community-based, aged care interventions in delaying or avoiding admission to residential aged care. METHOD: Nine databases were searched from January 2000 to February 2018 for English publications. Reference lists of relevant publications were searched. The databases yielded 55,221 citations and 50 citations were gleaned from other sources. Where there was sufficient homogeneity of study design, population, intervention and measures, meta-analyses were performed. Studies were grouped by the type of intervention: complex multifactorial interventions, minimal/single focus interventions, restorative programs, or by the target population (e.g. participants with dementia). RESULTS: Data from 31 randomised controlled trials (32 articles) that met our inclusion criteria were extracted and analysed. Compared to controls, complex multifactorial interventions in community aged care significantly improved older adults' ability to remain living at home (risk difference - 0.02; 95% CI -0.03, - 0.00; p = 0.04). Commonalities in the 13 studies with complex interventions were the use of comprehensive assessment, regular reviews, case management, care planning, referrals to additional services, individualised interventions, frequent client contact if required, and liaison with General Practitioners. Complex interventions did not have a significantly different effect on mortality. Single focus interventions did not show a significant effect in reducing residential aged care admissions (risk difference 0, 95% CI -0.01, 0.01; p = 0.71), nor for mortality or quality of life. Subgroup analysis of complex interventions for people with dementia showed significant risk reduction for residential aged care admissions (RD -0.05; 95% CI -0.09, -0.01; p = 0.02). Compared to controls, only interventions targeting participants with dementia had a significant effect on improving quality of life (SMD 3.38, 95% CI 3.02, 3.74; p < 0.000001). CONCLUSIONS: Where the goal is to avoid residential aged care admission for people with or without dementia, there is evidence for multifactorial, individualised community programs. The evidence suggests these interventions do not result in greater mortality and hence are safe. Minimal, single focus interventions will not achieve the targeted outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO Registration CRD42016050086 .

Rehabilitation Interventions for Upper Limb Function in the First Four Weeks Following Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Evidence.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the therapeutic interventions reported in the research literature and synthesize their effectiveness in improving upper limb (UL) function in the first 4 weeks poststroke. DATA SOURCES: Electronic databases and trial registries were searched from inception until June 2016, in addition to searching systematic reviews by hand. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), controlled trials, and interventional studies with pre/posttest design were included for adults within 4 weeks of any type of stroke with UL impairment. Participants all received an intervention of any physiotherapeutic or occupational therapeutic technique designed to address impairment or activity of the affected UL, which could be compared with usual care, sham, or another technique. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently assessed eligibility of full texts, and methodological quality of included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. DATA SYNTHESIS: A total of 104 trials (83 RCTs, 21 nonrandomized studies) were included (N=5225 participants). Meta-analyses of RCTs only (20 comparisons) and narrative syntheses were completed. Key findings included significant positive effects for modified constraint-induced movement therapy (mCIMT) (standardized mean difference [SMD]=1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], .21-1.97) and task-specific training (SMD=.37; 95% CI, .05-.68). Evidence was found to support supplementary use of biofeedback and electrical stimulation. Use of Bobath therapy was not supported. CONCLUSIONS: Use of mCIMT and task-specific training was supported, as was supplementary use of biofeedback and electrical simulation, within the acute phase poststroke. Further high-quality studies into the initial 4 weeks poststroke are needed to determine therapies for targeted functional UL outcomes.

The reassuring potential of spinal imaging results: development and testing of a brief, psycho-education intervention for patients attending secondary care.

PURPOSE: To develop and test a standardised method of interpreting spinal imaging findings in a manner designed to reassure patients with low back pain and promote engagement in an active recovery. METHODS: A five-phase development and testing process involved collaborative working party contributions, informal and formal appraisal of the intervention content by clinicians and consumers, a two-stage online evaluation of the take-home patient resource, and onsite testing. RESULTS: A total of 12 health professionals and 77 consumers were included in formal evaluative processes at various stages of the development and testing process. Consumers assessed the revised iteration of the take-home resource to be clearer and easier to understand than the original version. We integrated all feedback and evaluation outcomes to develop the final intervention content, which was approved by experienced clinicians and considered safe. We devised a framework to guide delivery of the low-cost clinical intervention and a 10-15-min timeframe was demonstrated to be realistic. CONCLUSIONS: We have developed, modified, and tested a pragmatic framework for a brief, psychoeducational intervention. We have established face validity and acceptability from key stakeholders and engaged clinicians and are ready to proceed with a pilot feasibility trial.

Can screening instruments accurately determine poor outcome risk in adults with recent onset low back pain? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Delivering efficient and effective healthcare is crucial for a condition as burdensome as low back pain (LBP). Stratified care strategies may be worthwhile, but rely on early and accurate patient screening using a valid and reliable instrument. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance of LBP screening instruments for determining risk of poor outcome in adults with LBP of less than 3 months duration. METHODS: Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, PEDro, Web of Science, SciVerse SCOPUS, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from June 2014 to March 2016. Prospective cohort studies involving patients with acute and subacute LBP were included. Studies administered a prognostic screening instrument at inception and reported outcomes at least 12 weeks after screening. Two independent reviewers extracted relevant data using a standardised spreadsheet. We defined poor outcome for pain to be ≥ 3 on an 11-point numeric rating scale and poor outcome for disability to be scores of ≥ 30% disabled (on the study authors' chosen disability outcome measure). RESULTS: We identified 18 eligible studies investigating seven instruments. Five studies investigated the STarT Back Tool: performance for discriminating pain outcomes at follow-up was 'non-informative' (pooled AUC = 0.59 (0.55-0.63), n = 1153) and 'acceptable' for discriminating disability outcomes (pooled AUC = 0.74 (0.66-0.82), n = 821). Seven studies investigated the Orebro Musculoskeletal Pain Screening Questionnaire: performance was 'poor' for discriminating pain outcomes (pooled AUC = 0.69 (0.62-0.76), n = 360), 'acceptable' for disability outcomes (pooled AUC = 0.75 (0.69-0.82), n = 512), and 'excellent' for absenteeism outcomes (pooled AUC = 0.83 (0.75-0.90), n = 243). Two studies investigated the Vermont Disability Prediction Questionnaire and four further instruments were investigated in single studies only. CONCLUSIONS: LBP screening instruments administered in primary care perform poorly at assigning higher risk scores to individuals who develop chronic pain than to those who do not. Risks of a poor disability outcome and prolonged absenteeism are likely to be estimated with greater accuracy. It is important that clinicians who use screening tools to obtain prognostic information consider the potential for misclassification of patient risk and its consequences for care decisions based on screening. However, it needs to be acknowledged that the outcomes on which we evaluated these screening instruments in some cases had a different threshold, outcome, and time period than those they were designed to predict. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO international prospective register of systematic reviews registration number CRD42015015778 .

Task-oriented interventions for children with developmental co-ordination disorder.

BACKGROUND: Developmental co-ordination disorder (DCD) is a common childhood disorder, which can persist into adolescence and adulthood. Children with DCD have difficulties in performing the essential motor tasks required for self-care, academic, social and recreational activities. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of task-oriented interventions on movement performance, psychosocial functions, activity, and participation for children with DCD and to examine differential intervention effects as a factor of age, sex, severity of DCD, intervention intensity, and type of intervention. SEARCH METHODS: In March 2017, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, 13 other databases, and five trials registers. We also searched reference lists, and contacted members of the mailing list of the International Conference on DCD to identify additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs that compared the task-oriented intervention with either an inactive control intervention or an active control intervention in children and adolescents aged four to 18 years with a diagnosis of DCD.Types of outcome measures included changes in motor function, as assessed by standardised performance outcome tests and questionnaires; adverse events; and measures of participation. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: All review authors participated in study selection, data extraction, and assessments of risk of bias and quality, and two review authors independently performed all tasks. Specifically, two review authors independently screened titles and abstracts to eliminate irrelevant studies, extracted data from the included studies, assessed risk of bias, and rated the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach. In cases of ambiguity or information missing from the paper, one review author contacted trial authors. MAIN RESULTS: This review included 15 studies (eight RCTs and seven quasi-RCTs). Study characteristicsThe trials included 649 participants of both sexes, ranging in age from five to 12 years.The participants were from Australia, Canada, China, Sweden, Taiwan, and the UK.Trials were conducted in hospital settings; at a university-based clinic, laboratory, or centre; in community centres; at home or school, or both at home and school.The durations of task-oriented interventions were mostly short term (less than six months), with the total number of sessions ranging from five to 50. The length of each session ranged from 30 to 90 minutes, and the frequencies ranged from once to seven times per week.We judged the risk of bias as moderate to high across the studies. Some elements were impossible to achieve (such as blinding of administering personnel or participants). KEY RESULTS: primary outcomesA meta-analysis of two RCTs and four quasi-RCTs found in favour of task-oriented interventions for improved motor performance compared to no intervention (mean difference (MD) -3.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) -5.88 to -1.39; P = 0.002; I2 = 43%; 6 trials, 169 children; very low-quality evidence).A meta-analysis of two RCTs found no effect of task-oriented interventions for improved motor performance compared to no intervention (MD -2.34, 95% CI -7.50 to 2.83; P = 0.38; I2 = 42%; 2 trials, 51 children; low-quality evidence).Two studies reported no adverse effects or events. Through personal correspondence, the authors of nine studies indicated that no injuries had occurred. KEY RESULTS: secondary outcomesDue to the limited number of studies with complete and consistent data, we were unable to perform any meta-analyses on our secondary measures or any subgroup analysis on age, sex, severity of DCD, and intervention intensity. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We have very little confidence in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect. The conclusions drawn from previous reviews, which unanimously reported beneficial effects of intervention, are inconsistent with our conclusions. This review highlights the need for carefully designed and executed RCTs to investigate the effect of interventions for children with DCD.

Circuit class therapy for improving mobility after stroke.

BACKGROUND: Circuit class therapy (CCT) offers a supervised group forum for people after stroke to practise tasks, enabling increased practice time without increasing staffing. This is an update of the original review published in 2010. OBJECTIVES: To examine the effectiveness and safety of CCT on mobility in adults with stroke. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched January 2017), CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library, Issue 12, 2016), MEDLINE (1950 to January 2017), Embase (1980 to January 2017), CINAHL (1982 to January 2017), and 14 other electronic databases (to January 2017). We also searched proceedings from relevant conferences, reference lists, and unpublished theses; contacted authors of published trials and other experts in the field; and searched relevant clinical trials and research registers. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) including people over 18 years old, diagnosed with stroke of any severity, at any stage, or in any setting, receiving CCT. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, assessed risk of bias in all included studies, and extracted data. MAIN RESULTS: We included 17 RCTs involving 1297 participants. Participants were stroke survivors living in the community or receiving inpatient rehabilitation. Most could walk 10 metres without assistance. Ten studies (835 participants) measured walking capacity (measuring how far the participant could walk in six minutes) demonstrating that CCT was superior to the comparison intervention (Six-Minute Walk Test: mean difference (MD), fixed-effect, 60.86 m, 95% confidence interval (CI) 44.55 to 77.17, GRADE: moderate). Eight studies (744 participants) measured gait speed, again finding in favour of CCT compared with other interventions (MD 0.15 m/s, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.19, GRADE: moderate). Both of these effects are considered clinically meaningful. We were able to pool other measures to demonstrate the superior effects of CCT for aspects of walking and balance (Timed Up and Go: five studies, 488 participants, MD -3.62 seconds, 95% CI -6.09 to -1.16; Activities of Balance Confidence scale: two studies, 103 participants, MD 7.76, 95% CI 0.66 to 14.87). Two other pooled balance measures failed to demonstrate superior effects (Berg Blance Scale and Step Test). Independent mobility, as measured by the Stroke Impact Scale, Functional Ambulation Classification and the Rivermead Mobility Index, also improved more in CCT interventions compared with others. Length of stay showed a non-significant effect in favour of CCT (two trials, 217 participants, MD -16.35, 95% CI -37.69 to 4.99). Eight trials (815 participants) measured adverse events (falls during therapy): there was a non-significant effect of greater risk of falls in the CCT groups (RD 0.03, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.08, GRADE: very low). Time after stroke did not make a difference to the positive outcomes, nor did the quality or size of the trials. Heterogeneity was generally low; risk of bias was variable across the studies with poor reporting of study conduct in several of the trials. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is moderate evidence that CCT is effective in improving mobility for people after stroke - they may be able to walk further, faster, with more independence and confidence in their balance. The effects may be greater later after the stroke, and are of clinical significance. Further high-quality research is required, investigating quality of life, participation and cost-benefits, that compares CCT with standard care and that also investigates the influence of factors such as stroke severity and age. The potential risk of increased falls during CCT needs to be monitored.

A qualitative study using the Theoretical Domains Framework to investigate why patients were or were not assessed for rehabilitation after stroke.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the factors perceived to affect rehabilitation assessment and referral practices for patients with stroke. DESIGN: Qualitative study using data from focus groups analysed thematically and then mapped to the Theoretical Domains Framework. SETTING: Eight acute stroke units in two states of Australia. SUBJECTS: Health professionals working in acute stroke units. INTERVENTIONS: Health professionals at all sites had participated in interventions to improve rehabilitation assessment and referral practices, which included provision of copies of an evidence-based decision-making rehabilitation Assessment Tool and pathway. RESULTS: Eight focus groups were conducted (32 total participants). Reported rehabilitation assessment and referral practices varied markedly between units. Continence and mood were not routinely assessed (4 units), and people with stroke symptoms were not consistently referred to rehabilitation (4 units). Key factors influencing practice were identified and included whether health professionals perceived that use of the Assessment Tool would improve rehabilitation assessment practices (theoretical domain 'social and professional role'); beliefs about outcomes from changing practice such as increased equity for patients or conversely that changing rehabilitation referral patterns would not affect access to rehabilitation ('belief about consequences'); the influence of the unit's relationships with other groups including rehabilitation teams ('social influences' domain) and understanding within the acute stroke unit team of the purpose of changing assessment practices ('knowledge' domain). CONCLUSION: This study has identified that health professionals' perceived roles, beliefs about consequences from changing practice and relationships with rehabilitation service providers were perceived to influence rehabilitation assessment and referral practices on Australian acute stroke units.

Association between television viewing time and risk of incident stroke in a general population: Results from the REGARDS study.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to explore the relationship between TV/video viewing, as a measure of sedentary behavior, and risk of incident stroke in a large prospective cohort of men and women. METHODS: This analysis involved 22,257 participants from the REasons for Geographic And Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) study who reported at baseline the amount of time spent watching TV/video daily. Suspected stroke events were identified at six-monthly telephone calls and were physician-adjudicated. Cox proportional hazards models were used to examine risk of stroke at follow-up. RESULTS: During 7.1years of follow-up, 727 incident strokes occurred. After adjusting for demographic factors, watching TV/video ≥4h/day (30% of the sample) was associated with a hazard ratio of 1.37 increased risk of all stroke (95% confidence interval (CI), 1.10-1.71) and incident ischemic stroke (hazard ratio 1.35, CI 1.06-1.72). This association was attenuated by socioeconomic factors such as employment status, education and income. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that while TV/video viewing is associated with increased stroke risk, the effect of TV/video viewing on stroke risk may be explained through other risk factors.

Self management programmes for quality of life in people with stroke.

BACKGROUND: Stroke results from an acute lack of blood supply to the brain and becomes a chronic health condition for millions of survivors around the world. Self management can offer stroke survivors a pathway to promote their recovery. Self management programmes for people with stroke can include specific education about the stroke and likely effects but essentially, also focusses on skills training to encourage people to take an active part in their management. Such skills training can include problem-solving, goal-setting, decision-making, and coping skills. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of self management interventions on the quality of life of adults with stroke who are living in the community, compared with inactive or active (usual care) control interventions. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following databases from inception to April 2016: the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, SCOPUS, Web of Science, OTSeeker, OT Search, PEDro, REHABDATA, and DARE. We also searched the following trial registries: ClinicalTrials.gov, Stroke Trials Registry, Current Controlled Trials, World Health Organization, and Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials of adults with stroke living in the community who received self management interventions. These interventions included more than one component of self management or targeted more than a single domain of change, or both. Interventions were compared with either an inactive control (waiting list or usual care) or active control (alternate intervention such as education only). Measured outcomes included changes in quality of life, self efficacy, activity or participation levels, impairments, health service usage, health behaviours (such as medication adherence or lifestyle behaviours), cost, participant satisfaction, or adverse events. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted prespecified data from all included studies and assessed trial quality and risk of bias. We performed meta-analyses where possible to pool results. MAIN RESULTS: We included 14 trials with 1863 participants. Evidence from six studies showed that self management programmes improved quality of life in people with stroke (standardised mean difference (SMD) random effects 0.34, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.05 to 0.62, P = 0.02; moderate quality evidence) and improved self efficacy (SMD, random effects 0.33, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.61, P = 0.03; low quality evidence) compared with usual care. Individual studies reported benefits for health-related behaviours such as reduced use of health services, smoking, and alcohol intake, as well as improved diet and attitude. However, there was no superior effect for such programmes in the domains of locus of control, activities of daily living, medication adherence, participation, or mood. Statistical heterogeneity was mostly low; however, there was much variation in the types and delivery of programmes. Risk of bias was relatively low for complex intervention clinical trials where participants and personnel could not be blinded. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The current evidence indicates that self management programmes may benefit people with stroke who are living in the community. The benefits of such programmes lie in improved quality of life and self efficacy. These are all well-recognised goals for people after stroke. There is evidence for many modes of delivery and examples of tailoring content to the target group. Leaders were usually professionals but peers (stroke survivors and carers) were also reported - the commonality is being trained and expert in stroke and its consequences. It would be beneficial for further research to be focused on identifying key features of effective self management programmes and assessing their cost-effectiveness.

A randomised controlled trial of sensory awareness training and additional motor practice for learning scalpel skills in podiatry students.

BACKGROUND: The process of using a scalpel, like all other motor activities, is dependent upon the successful integration of afferent (sensory), cognitive and efferent (motor) processes. During learning of these skills, even if motor practice is carefully monitored there is still an inherent risk involved. It is also possible that this strategy could reinforce high levels of anxiety experienced by the student and affect student self-efficacy, causing detrimental effects on motor learning. An alternative training strategy could be through targeting sensory rather than motor processes. METHODS: Second year podiatry students who were about to commence learning scalpel skills were recruited. Participants were randomly allocated into sensory awareness training (Sensory), additional motor practice (Motor) or usual teaching only (Control) groups. Participants were then evaluated on psychological measures (Intrinsic Motivation Inventory) and dexterity measures (Purdue Pegboard, Grooved Pegboard Test and a grip-lift task). RESULTS: A total of 44 participants were included in the study. There were no baseline differences or significant differences between the three groups over time on the Perceived Competence, Effort/ Importance or Pressure/ Tension, psychological measures. All groups showed a significant increase in Perceived Competence over time (F1,41 = 13.796, p = 0.001). Only one variable for the grip-lift task (Preload Duration for the non-dominant hand) showed a significant difference over time between the groups (F2,41 = 3.280, p = 0.038), specifically, Motor and Control groups. CONCLUSIONS: The use of sensory awareness training, or additional motor practice did not provide a more effective alternative compared with usual teaching. Further research may be warranted using more engaged training, provision of supervision and greater participant numbers. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR): ACTRN12616001428459 . Registered 13th October 2016. Registered Retrospectively.

Effectiveness of a structured circuit class therapy model in stroke rehabilitation: a protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Currently, the key advocacy in neuroscientific studies for stroke rehabilitation is that therapy should be directed towards task specificity performed with multiple repetitions. Circuit Class Therapy (CCT) is well suited to accomplish multiple task-specific activities. However, while repetitive task practice is achievable with circuit class therapy, in stroke survivors repetitive activities may be affected by poor neurologic inputs to motor units, resulting in decreases in discharging rates which consequently may reduce the efficiency of muscular contraction. To accomplish multiple repetitions, stroke survivors may require augmented duration of practice. To date, no study has examined the effect of augmented duration of CCT in stroke rehabilitation, and specifically what duration of CCT is more effective in influencing functional capacity among stroke survivors. METHODS/DESIGN: Using a randomised controlled trial with blinded outcome assessment, this study is aimed at determining the effectiveness of structured augmented CCT in stroke rehabilitation. Sixty-eight stroke survivors (to be recruited from a tertiary health institution in Kano, Northwest, Nigeria) will be randomised into one of four groups: three intervention groups of differing CCT durations namely: 60 min, 90 min, and 120 minuntes respectively, and a control group. Participants will take part in an 8-week structured intensive CCT intervention. Participants will be assessed at baseline, post-intervention, and six-month follow-up for the effectiveness of the varied durations of therapy, using standardised tools. Based on the WHO-ICF model, the outcomes are body structure/function, activity limitation, and participation restriction measures. DISCUSSION: It is expected that the outcome of this study will clarify whether increasing CCT duration leads to better recovery of motor function in stroke survivors. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Pan African Clinical Trial Registry (PACTR): PACTR201311000701191.

Vestibular rehabilitation for unilateral peripheral vestibular dysfunction.

BACKGROUND: This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in The Cochrane Library in Issue 4, 2007 and previously updated in 2011.Unilateral peripheral vestibular dysfunction (UPVD) can occur as a result of disease, trauma or postoperatively. The dysfunction is characterised by complaints of dizziness, visual or gaze disturbances and balance impairment. Current management includes medication, physical manoeuvres and exercise regimes, the latter known collectively as vestibular rehabilitation. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of vestibular rehabilitation in the adult, community-dwelling population of people with symptomatic unilateral peripheral vestibular dysfunction. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders Group Trials Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); PubMed; EMBASE; CINAHL; Web of Science; BIOSIS Previews; Cambridge Scientific Abstracts; ISRCTN and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The most recent search was 18 January 2014. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of adults living in the community, diagnosed with symptomatic unilateral peripheral vestibular dysfunction. We sought comparisons of vestibular rehabilitation versus control (e.g. placebo), other treatment (non-vestibular rehabilitation, e.g. pharmacological) or another form of vestibular rehabilitation. Our primary outcome measure was change in the specified symptomatology (for example, proportion with dizziness resolved, frequency or severity of dizziness). Secondary outcomes were measures of function, quality of life and/or measure(s) of physiological status, where reproducibility has been confirmed and shown to be relevant or related to health status (for example, posturography), and adverse effects DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used the standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration. MAIN RESULTS: We included 39 studies involving 2441 participants with unilateral peripheral vestibular disorders in the review. Trials addressed the effectiveness of vestibular rehabilitation against control/sham interventions, medical interventions or other forms of vestibular rehabilitation. Non-blinding of outcome assessors and selective reporting were threats that may have biased the results in 25% of studies, but otherwise there was a low risk of selection or attrition bias.Individual and pooled analyses of the primary outcome, frequency of dizziness, showed a statistically significant effect in favour of vestibular rehabilitation over control or no intervention (odds ratio (OR) 2.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.85 to 3.86; four studies, 565 participants). Secondary outcomes measures related to levels of activity or participation measured, for example, with the Dizziness Handicap Inventory, which also showed a strong trend towards significant differences between the groups (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.83, 95% CI -1.02 to -0.64). The exception to this was when movement-based vestibular rehabilitation was compared to physical manoeuvres for benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV), where the latter was shown to be superior in cure rate in the short term (OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.49). There were no reported adverse effects. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is moderate to strong evidence that vestibular rehabilitation is a safe, effective management for unilateral peripheral vestibular dysfunction, based on a number of high-quality randomised controlled trials. There is moderate evidence that vestibular rehabilitation resolves symptoms and improves functioning in the medium term. However, there is evidence that for the specific diagnostic group of BPPV, physical (repositioning) manoeuvres are more effective in the short term than exercise-based vestibular rehabilitation; although a combination of the two is effective for longer-term functional recovery. There is insufficient evidence to discriminate between differing forms of vestibular rehabilitation.

Rehabilitation assessments for patients with stroke in Australian hospitals do not always reflect the patients' rehabilitation requirements.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the frequency and factors associated with patients with stroke in Australian hospitals receiving documented rehabilitation assessments; to examine the criteria used when rehabilitation was not recommended; and to examine whether being assessed for rehabilitation affected access to rehabilitation. DESIGN: Retrospective medical record audit of patients with a diagnosis of stroke who were discharged consecutively between 2013 and 2014. SETTING: Acute care public hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: Adults with stroke (N=333) receiving care in participating hospitals. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Documented assessment regarding patient suitability for rehabilitation during acute hospitalization. RESULTS: Data from 292 patients were included for analysis (60% men; mean age, 72y). Of the patients, 42% were assessed for rehabilitation by a health professional providing care in the hospital, 43% were assessed for rehabilitation by a representative from a rehabilitation service, and 37% did not receive any documented rehabilitation assessment. In multivariable analysis, patients were significantly more likely to be assessed for rehabilitation if they lived in the community before their stroke, had moderate severity strokes, or received occupational therapy during hospital admission. Rehabilitation was not recommended in 9% of assessments despite the presence of stroke-related symptoms. Patients not assessed for rehabilitation were significantly less likely to access rehabilitation than patients who were assessed. CONCLUSIONS: More than one third of patients were not assessed for rehabilitation. When assessed, rehabilitation was not consistently recommended for patients with stroke-related symptoms. This study highlights factors that increase the likelihood of being assessed for rehabilitation.

Physical activity frequency and risk of incident stroke in a national US study of blacks and whites.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Regular physical activity (PA) is an important recommendation for stroke prevention. We compared the associations of self-reported PA with incident stroke in the Reasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) study. METHODS: REGARDS recruited 30 239 US blacks (42%) and whites, aged ≥45 years with follow-up every 6 months for stroke events. Excluding those with prior stroke, analysis involved 27 348 participants who reported their frequency of moderate to vigorous intensity PA at baseline according to 3 categories: none (physical inactivity), 1 to 3×, and ≥4× per week. Stroke and transient ischemic attack cases were identified during an average of 5.7 years of follow-up. Cox proportional hazards models were constructed to examine whether self-reported PA was associated with risk of incident stroke. RESULTS: Physical inactivity was reported by 33% of participants and was associated with a hazard ratio of 1.20 (95% confidence intervals, 1.02-1.42; P=0.035). Adjustment for demographic and socioeconomic factors did not affect hazard ratio, but further adjustment for traditional stroke risk factors (diabetes mellitus, hypertension, body mass index, alcohol use, and smoking) partially attenuated this risk (hazard ratio, 1.14 [0.95-1.37]; P=0.17). There was no significant association between PA frequency and risk of stroke by sex groups, although there was a trend toward increased risk for men reporting PA 0 to 3× a week compared with ≥4× a week. CONCLUSIONS: Self-reported low PA frequency is associated with increased risk of incident stroke. Any effect of PA is likely to be mediated through reducing traditional risk factors.

Standardizing the approach to evidence-based upper limb rehabilitation after stroke.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To describe the development of a clinical algorithm to enable standardized intervention prescription and progression for upper limb rehabilitation post stroke. METHODS: We developed a standardized clinical algorithm that involved assessment of 18 critical impairments of upper limb function and application of task-specific exercises appropriate to the level of impairment. These tasks were consistent with recent evidence-based guidelines. We tested the feasibility of the algorithm with 20 participants recently discharged from inpatient rehabilitation following stroke who received outpatient therapy according to the clinical algorithm. Participants' abilities were regularly re-evaluated and task difficulty progressed. Outcomes were assessed at the level of impairment (Action Research Arm Test, Fugl-Meyer Assessment) and activity (Motor Activity Log). RESULTS: All participants attended the 9 sessions of training over the 3-week intervention period (100% compliance). No adverse events were reported. There were significant improvements in all outcome measures (P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: This evidence-based upper limb clinical algorithm provides a framework for standardizing task-specific training following stroke based on the assessment of functioning of the individual following stroke in day-to-day life. This approach is appropriate for patients with different functional levels and may be used to standardize individual or group self-directed practice sessions or to standardize the intervention and progressions in experimental studies.

Synthesis of clinical practice guideline recommendations for the primary health care of chronic musculoskeletal pain.

RATIONALE AND AIMS: The prevalence of chronic musculoskeletal pain (CMSP) is high and rising. The multidimensional impact of CMSP on individuals necessitates multidisciplinary evidence-based strategies to prevent and manage chronic pain. Primary health care (PHC) is the first point of care in many healthcare systems and evidence implementation at this point is important. We aim to describe the process of development of a comprehensive list of evidence-based recommendations derived from different high-quality clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) to inform the PHC healthcare of adults with CMSP. METHOD: A systematic review was conducted of CPGs that focussed on PHC management of CMSP in adults. CPGs were identified by searching 13 guideline clearinghouses and five online databases. Eligible CPGs were critically appraised using Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation, Version II (AGREE II). A stepwise systematic process was followed to identify a core set of recommendations. This process comprised the following: extract recommendations; analyze recommendations; synthesize recommendations by assimilating similar recommendations; determine the strength of the body of evidence underpinning the recommendations and produce a list of synthesized recommendations. RESULTS: Six high-quality CPGs were identified, providing 156 recommendations. These were condensed to 42 statements covering topics about the approach to care, assessment, advice and education, referral, pharmacological management, physical therapy, electrotherapy, psychological therapy, complementary therapy and self-management. The set of recommendations encompasses a person-centered approach, collaborative decision making, a biopsychosocial approach, patient education and empowerment towards self-management. CONCLUSION: The process of developing composite recommendations from multiple CPGs enables end-users to access comprehensive information on managing CMSP in PHC settings that is not available from one singular CPG. The content and evidence base for recommendations varied between CPGs. A similar stepwise process may be used to develop a core set of recommendations for other health conditions, where multiple, diverse CPGs exist.