Do lower limb motor-evoked potentials predict walking outcomes post-stroke?

BACKGROUND: This observational study examined whether lower limb (LL) motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) 1 week post-stroke predict recovery of independent walking, use of ankle-foot orthosis (AFO) or walking aid, at 3 and 6 months post-stroke. METHODS: Non-ambulatory participants were recruited 5 days post-stroke. Transcranial magnetic stimulation was used to determine tibialis anterior MEP status and clinical assessments (age, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS), ankle dorsiflexion strength, LL motricity index, Berg Balance Test) were completed 1 week post-stroke. Functional Ambulation Category (FAC), use of AFO and walking aid were assessed 3 months and 6 months post-stroke. MEP status, alone and combined with clinical measures, and walking outcomes at 3 and 6 months were analysed with Pearson χ2 and multivariate binary logistic regression. RESULTS: Ninety participants were included (median age 72 years (38-97 years)). Most participants (81%) walked independently (FAC ≥ 4), 17% used an AFO, and 49% used a walking aid 3 months post-stroke with similar findings at 6 months. Independent walking was better predicted by age, LL strength and Berg Balance Test (accuracy 92%, 95% CI 85% to 97%) than MEP status (accuracy 73%, 95% CI 63% to 83%). AFO use was better predicted by NIHSS and MEP status (accuracy 88%, 95% CI 79% to 94%) than MEP status alone (accuracy 76%, 95% CI 65% to 84%). No variables predicted use of walking aids. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of LL MEPs 1-week post-stroke predicts independent walking at 3 and 6 months post-stroke. However, the absence of MEPs does not preclude independent walking. Clinical factors, particularly age, balance and stroke severity, more strongly predict independent walking than MEP status. LL MEP status adds little value as a biomarker for walking outcomes.

Accuracy of Physiotherapist Predictions for Independent Walking After Stroke.

BACKGROUND: The use of prediction tools in stroke rehabilitation research and clinical practice is increasing, but it is not clear whether these prediction tools out-perform clinician predictions. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare physiotherapist predictions for independent walking with the Time to Walking Independently after STroke (TWIST) prediction tool. METHODS: Adults with new lower limb weakness and unable to walk independently (Functional Ambulation Category [FAC] < 4) were recruited. At 1 week post-stroke, the treating physiotherapist was asked to predict whether their patient would achieve independent walking by 4, 6, 9, 12, 16, or 26 weeks, or remain dependent. Predictions were also made using the TWIST prediction tool, but not shared. Binary logistic regressions were conducted with the time independent walking was achieved as the dependent variable and independent variables were the physiotherapist and TWIST predictions. RESULTS: Ninety-one participants were included (median age 71 years, 36 [40%] female). Most participants (67 [74%]) were non-ambulatory (FAC = 0) at 1-week post-stroke. Thirty-seven physiotherapists were recruited. Physiotherapists made accurate predictions for time taken to achieve independent walking for 39 participants (43%). Prediction accuracy was not related to physiotherapist confidence or years of stroke-specific experience. TWIST out-performed physiotherapist predictions (Physiotherapists 76%-77%, TWIST 86%-88% accurate) for participants who achieved independent walking by 4, 6, and 9 weeks post-stroke. Accuracy of physiotherapist and TWIST predictions was similar for 16 and 26 weeks post-stroke. CONCLUSIONS: The TWIST prediction tool is more accurate than physiotherapists at predicting whether a patient will achieve independent walking by 4, 6, or 9 weeks post-stroke, but not for 16 or 26 weeks post-stroke. TWIST may be useful to inform early rehabilitation and discharge planning. Clinical Trial Registration-URL: www.anzctr.org.au Unique Identifier: ACTRN12617001434381.

Do integrated stroke units affect patient and family experience of care transitions?

PURPOSE: Patients and families identify discharge from hospital as highly challenging. Less is known about experiences of transition between acute services and inpatient rehabilitation. We aimed to understand the experiences of patients and families as they transition to inpatient rehabilitation services, before and after the opening of a new integrated stroke and rehabilitation unit (ISU). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Adults were recruited 7 days after transfer to inpatient rehabilitation, in two 6-month periods before and after the opening of the ISU. Their experiences of care continuity were evaluated with a survey. Univariate analyses compared survey data pre- and post-ISU. A subset of participants completed semi-structured interviews that underwent thematic analysis. RESULTS: 150 patients were recruited (median age 60 years, range 20-92 years, 72 female). There were no differences between pre- and post-ISU survey scores for patient or family experiences (all p > 0.3). Interview analysis identified 3 major themes: "Whanaungatanga - the foundation of patient experience", "In the dark and out of control", and "A nice view…but I want to be able to do more." CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of an integrated stroke and rehabilitation unit maintained levels of patient and family satisfaction. Interviews identified important themes for services planning to improve patient experience.

Inpatient transitions can be a challenging experience for patients and family members.A new ward environment that eliminated the transition from acute to inpatient rehabilitation services had little effect on patient and family experiences.Relational aspects of inpatient care are more salient for patients and families than the physical environment.Services planning to improve patient experience should prioritise investing in staff alongside improvements to the ward environment.

The TWIST Tool Predicts When Patients Will Recover Independent Walking After Stroke: An Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: The likelihood of regaining independent walking after stroke influences rehabilitation and hospital discharge planning. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to develop and internally validate a tool to predict whether and when a patient will walk independently in the first 6 months post-stroke. METHODS: Adults with stroke were recruited if they had new lower limb weakness and were unable to walk independently. Clinical assessments were completed one week post-stroke. The primary outcome was time post-stroke by which independent walking (Functional Ambulation Category score ≥ 4) was achieved. Cox hazard regression identified predictors for achieving independent walking by 4, 6, 9, 16, or 26 weeks post-stroke. The cut-off and weighting for each predictor was determined using ß-coefficients. Predictors were assigned a score and summed for a final TWIST score. The probability of achieving independent walking at each time point for each TWIST score was calculated. RESULTS: We included 93 participants (36 women, median age 71 years). Age < 80 years, knee extension strength Medical Research Council grade ≥ 3/5, and Berg Balance Test < 6, 6 to 15, or ≥ 16/56, predicted independent walking and were combined to form the TWIST prediction tool. The TWIST prediction tool was at least 83% accurate for all time points. CONCLUSIONS: The TWIST tool combines routine bedside tests at one week post-stroke to accurately predict the probability of an individual patient achieving independent walking by 4, 6, 9, 16, or 26 weeks post-stroke. If externally validated, the TWIST prediction tool may benefit patients and clinicians by informing rehabilitation decisions and discharge planning.

Determining the Functional Status of the Corticospinal Tract Within One Week of Stroke.

High interindividual variability in the recovery of upper limb (UL) function after stroke means it is difficult to predict an individual's potential for recovery based on clinical assessments alone. The functional integrity of the corticospinal tract is an important prognostic biomarker for recovery of UL function, particularly for those with severe initial UL impairment. This article presents a protocol for evaluating corticospinal tract function within 1 week of stroke. This protocol can be used to select and stratify patients in trials of interventions designed to improve UL motor recovery and outcomes after stroke. The protocol also forms part of the PREP2 algorithm, which predicts UL function for individual patients 3 months poststroke. The algorithm sequentially combines a UL strength assessment, age, transcranial magnetic stimulation, and stroke severity, within a few days of the stroke. The benefits of using PREP2 in clinical practice are described elsewhere. This article focuses on the use of a UL strength assessment and transcranial magnetic stimulation to evaluate corticospinal tract function.