Stroke in Sierra Leone. the stroke risk factors for people with HIV: A prospective case-control study.

BACKGROUND: HIV infection rates are relatively low in Sierra Leone and in West Africa but the contribution of HIV to the risk factors for stroke and outcomes is unknown. In this study, we examined stroke types, presentation, risk factors and outcome in HIV stroke patients compared with controls. METHODS: We used data from the Stroke in Sierra Leone Study at 2 tertiary hospitals in Freetown, Sierra Leone. A case control design was used to compare stroke type, presentation, risk factors and outcome in sero-positive HIV patients with HIV negative stroke controls. Controls were matched for age and gender and a 1:4 ratio cases to controls was used to optimize power. Analysis was performed using the Pearson x2 for categorical variable, Paired-T test and Mann-Whitney U test for continuous variables. A p-value of less than 0.05 was taken as the level of statistical significance. RESULTS: Of 511 (51.8%) stroke patients tested for HIV, 36 (7.1%) were positive. Univariate unmatched analysis showed a stroke mean age of 49 years in HIV-positive versus 58 years in HIV-negative population (p = <0.001). In the case-control group, ischaemic stroke is the major type reported in both populations, HIV-negative population: 77 (53.5%) versus HIV-positive: 25 (69.4%) (p = 0.084). Hypertension is the most prevalent risk factor in both groups, HIV-positive: 23 (63.9%) versus HIV-negative: 409 (86.1%) (p = 0.001). Lower CD4+ count is associated in-hospital mortality (p = <0.001). CONCLUSION: These findings support the current call for timely management of stroke and HIV through integrated care.

Rating the intelligibility of dysarthic speech amongst people with Parkinson's Disease: a comparison of trained and untrained listeners.

Intelligibility of speech is a key outcome in speech and language therapy (SLT) and research. SLT students frequently participate as raters of intelligibility but we lack information about whether they rate intelligibility in the same way as the general public. This paper aims to determine if there is a difference in the intelligibility ratings made by SLT students (trained in speech related topics) compared to individuals from the general public (untrained). The SLT students were in year 2 of a BSc programme or the first 6 months of a MSc programme. We recorded 10 speakers with Parkinson's disease (PD) related speech reading aloud the words and sentences from the Assessment of Intelligibility of Dysarthric Speech. These speech recordings were rated for intelligibility by 'trained' raters and 'untrained' raters. The effort required to understand the speech was also reported. There were no significant differences in the measures of intelligibility from the trained and untrained raters for words or sentences after adjusting for speaker by including them as a covariate in the model. There was a slight increase in effort reported by the untrained raters for the sentences. This difference in reported effort was not evident with the words. SLT students can be recruited alongside individuals from the general public as naïve raters for evaluating intelligibility in people with speech disorders.

Stepping to an Auditory Metronome Improves Weight-Bearing Symmetry in Poststroke Hemiparesis.

Asymmetry in weight-bearing is a common feature in poststroke hemiparesis and is related to temporal asymmetry during walking. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of an auditory cue for stepping in place on measures of temporal and weight-bearing asymmetry. A total of 10 community-dwelling adults (6 males and 4 females) with chronic poststroke hemiparesis performed 5 un-cued stepping trials and 5 stepping trials cued by an auditory metronome cue. A Vicon system was used to collect full body kinematic trajectories. Two force platforms were used to measure ground reaction forces. Step, swing, and stance times were used to calculate temporal symmetry ratios. Weight-bearing was assessed using the vertical component of the ground reaction force and center of mass-center of pressure separation at mid-stance. Weight-bearing asymmetry was significantly reduced during stepping with an auditory cue. Asymmetry values for step, swing, and stance times were also significantly reduced with auditory cueing. These findings show that auditory cueing when stepping in place produces immediate reductions in measures of temporal asymmetry and dynamic weight-bearing asymmetry.

Assistive devices, hip precautions, environmental modifications and training to prevent dislocation and improve function after hip arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is one of the most common orthopaedic operations performed worldwide. Painful osteoarthritis of the hip is the primary indication for THA. Following THA, people have conventionally been provided with equipment, such as raised toilet seats and chairs, and educated to avoid activities that could cause the hip joint to be in a position of flexion over 90 degrees, or adduction or rotation past the midline. These aspects of occupational therapy have been advocated to reduce the risks of prosthesis dislocation. However, the appropriateness of these recommendations has been questioned. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of provision of assistive devices, education on hip precautions, environmental modifications and training in activities of daily living (ADL) and extended ADL (EADL) for people undergoing THA. SEARCH METHODS: We searched MEDLINE (1946 to April 2016), EMBASE (1947 to April 2016), the Cochrane Library including CENTRAL (Issue 4 of 12, 2016), Database of Reviews of Effects (DARE), Health Technology Assessment (HTA), Economic Evaluations Database (EED), CINAHL, PEDro and CIRRIE from inception to April 2016. In addition we checked Controlled Clinical Trials, Clinicaltrials.gov, the National Institutes of Health Trial Registry, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP) and the OpenGrey database from inception to April 2016. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs and cluster-RCTs that evaluated the effectiveness of the provision of assistive devices, education on hip precautions, environmental modifications, or training in ADL and EADL for people undergoing THA. The main outcomes of interest were pain, function, health-related quality of life (HRQOL), global assessment of treatment success, reoperation rate, hip dislocation and adverse events. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures recognised by Cochrane. We conducted a systematic literature search using several databases and contacted corresponding authors, appraised the evidence using the Cochrane risk of bias tool, analysed the data using a narrative analysis approach (as it was not possible to conduct a meta-analysis due to heterogeneity in interventions), and interpreted all outcomes using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We included three trials with a total of 492 participants who had received 530 THA. The evidence presented with a high risk of performance, detection and reporting bias.One study (81 participants) compared outcomes for participants randomised to the provision of hip precautions, equipment and functional restrictions versus no provision of hip precautions, equipment or functional restrictions. Due to the quality of evidence being very low, we are uncertain if the provision of hip precautions, equipment and functional restrictions improved function measured using the Harris Hip Score at 12 month follow-up, or health-related quality of life (HRQOL) measured by the Short Form-12 at four week follow-up, compared to not providing this. There were no incidences of hip dislocation or adverse events in either group during the initial 12 postoperative months. The study did not measure pain score, global assessment of treatment success or total adverse events.One study (265 participants; 303 THAs) evaluated the provision of hip precautions with versus without the prescription of postoperative equipment and restrictions to functional activities. Due to the quality of evidence being very low, we are uncertain if perceived satisfaction in the rate of recovery differed in people who were not prescribed postoperative equipment and restrictions (135/151 satisfied) compared to those prescribed equipment and restrictions (113/152) (risk ratio (RR) 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.75 to 0.93; 265 participants, one trial; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) = 7). Due to the low quality evidence, we are uncertain if the incidence of hip dislocation differed between participants provided with hip precautions with (1/152) compared to without providing equipment or restrictions post-THA (0/151) (RR 2.98, 95% CI 0.12 to 72.59). The study did not measure pain, function, HRQOL, re-operation rates or total adverse events.One study (146 participants) investigated the provision of an enhanced postoperative education and rehabilitation service on hospital discharge to promote functional ADL versus a conventional rehabilitation intervention in the community. This study was of very low quality evidence. We were uncertain if the provision of enhanced postoperative education and rehabilitation improved function at six months follow-up, when assessed using the Objective and Subjective Functional Capability Index (146 participants, one trial; P > 0.05; no numerical results provided) compared to conventional rehabilitation. The study did not measure pain score, HRQOL, global assessment of treatment success, hip dislocation, re-operation rate or total adverse events. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Very low quality evidence is available from single trials, thus we are uncertain if hip precautions with or without the addition of equipment and functional restrictions are effective in preventing dislocation and improving outcomes after THA. There is also insufficient evidence to support or refute the adoption of a postoperative community rehabilitation programme consisting of functional reintegration and education compared to conventional rehabilitation strategies based on functional outcomes.Further high-quality trials are warranted to assess the outcomes of different occupational therapy interventions both in the short and longer-term for those who undergo THA. An assessment of the impact of such interventions on pain and restriction on personal ADL, EADL and instrumental ADL is needed, and also of functional integration-type interventions rather than just hip precautions, equipment and restrictions.

A feasibility randomised controlled trial of pre-operative occupational therapy to optimise recovery for patients undergoing primary total hip replacement for osteoarthritis (PROOF-THR).

OBJECTIVE: To assess the feasibility of a pre-operative occupational therapy intervention for patients undergoing primary total hip replacement. DESIGN: Single blinded feasibility randomised controlled trial, with data collection prior to the intervention, and at 4, 12, and 26 weeks following surgery. SETTING: Recruitment from two NHS orthopaedic outpatient centres in the West Midlands, UK. SUBJECTS: Patients awaiting primary total hip replacement due to osteoarthritis were recruited. Following pre-operative assessment, patients were individually randomised to intervention or control by a computer-generated block randomisation algorithm stratified by age and centre. INTERVENTIONS: The intervention group received a pre-surgery home visit by an occupational therapist who discussed expectations, assessed home safety, and provided appropriate adaptive equipment. The control group received treatment as usual. OUTCOMES: The study assessed the feasibility of recruitment procedures, delivery of the intervention, appropriateness of outcome measures and data collection methods. Health related quality of life and resource use were recorded at 4, 12 and 26 weeks. RESULTS: Forty-four participants were recruited, 21 were randomised to the occupational therapy intervention and 23 to usual care. Analysis of 26 week data included 18 participants in the intervention group and 21 in the control. The intervention was delivered successfully with no withdrawals or crossovers; 5/44 were lost to follow-up with further missing data for participation and resource use. CONCLUSIONS: The feasibility study provided the information required to conduct a definitive trial. Burden of assessment would need to be addressed. A total of 219 patients would be required in an efficacy trial.

A Randomised Controlled Trial of Treatment for Post-Stroke Homonymous Hemianopia: Screening and Recruitment.

The authors report the screening process and recruitment figures for the VISION (Visual Impairment in Stroke; Intervention Or Not) trial. This is a prospective, randomised, single-blinded, three-arm controlled trial in 14 UK acute hospital stroke units. Stroke teams identified stroke survivors suspected as having homonymous hemianopia. Interventions included Fresnel prisms versus visual search training versus standard care (information only). Primary outcome was change in visual field assessment from baseline to 26 weeks. Secondary measures included change in quality-of-life questionnaires. Recruitment opened in May 2011. A total of 1171 patients were screened by the local principal investigators. Of 1171 patients, 178 (15.2%) were eligible for recruitment: 87 patients (7.4%) provided consent and were recruited; 91 patients (7.8%) did not provide consent, and 993 of 1171 patients (84.8%) failed to meet the eligibility criteria. Almost half were excluded due to complete/partial recovery of hemianopia (43.6%; n = 511). The most common ineligibility reason was recovery of hemianopia. When designing future trials in this area, changes in eligibility criteria/outcome selection to allow more patients to be recruited should be considered, e.g., less stringent levels of visual acuity/refractive error. Alternative outcomes measurable in the home environment, rather than requiring hospital attendance for follow-up, could facilitate increased recruitment.

Physiotherapy for Parkinson's disease: a comparison of techniques.

BACKGROUND: Despite medical therapies and surgical interventions for Parkinson's disease (PD), patients develop progressive disability. The role of physiotherapy is to maximise functional ability and minimise secondary complications through movement rehabilitation within a context of education and support for the whole person. The overall aim is to optimise independence, safety and wellbeing, thereby enhancing quality of life. Trials have shown that physiotherapy has short-term benefits in PD. However, which physiotherapy intervention is most effective remains unclear. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of one physiotherapy intervention compared with a second approach in patients with PD. SEARCH METHODS: Relevant trials were identified by electronic searches of numerous literature databases (for example MEDLINE, EMBASE) and trial registers, plus handsearching of major journals, abstract books, conference proceedings and reference lists of retrieved publications. The literature search included trials published up to the end of January 2012. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of one physiotherapy intervention versus another physiotherapy intervention in patients with PD. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data were abstracted independently from each paper by two authors. Trials were classified into the following intervention comparisons: general physiotherapy, exercise, treadmill training, cueing, dance and martial arts. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 43 trials were identified with 1673 participants. All trials used small patient numbers (average trial size of 39 participants); the methods of randomisation and concealment of allocation were poor or not stated in most trials. Blinded assessors were used in just over half of the trials and only 10 stated that they used intention-to-treat analysis.A wide variety of validated and customised outcome measures were used to assess the effectiveness of physiotherapy interventions. The most frequently reported physiotherapy outcomes were gait speed and timed up and go, in 19 and 15 trials respectively. Only five of the 43 trials reported data on falls (12%). The motor subscales of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale and Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire-39 were the most commonly reported clinician-rated disability and patient-rated quality of life outcome measures, used in 22 and 13 trials respectively. The content and delivery of the physiotherapy interventions varied widely in the trials included within this review, so no quantitative meta-analysis could be performed. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Considering the small number of participants examined, the methodological flaws in many of the studies, the possibility of publication bias, and the variety of interventions, formal comparison of the different physiotherapy techniques could not be performed. There is insufficient evidence to support or refute the effectiveness of one physiotherapy intervention over another in PD.This review shows that a wide range of physiotherapy interventions to treat PD have been tested . There is a need for more specific trials with improved treatment strategies to underpin the most appropriate choice of physiotherapy intervention and the outcomes measured.

Factors guiding therapist decision making in the rehabilitation of physical function after severely disabling stroke - an ethnographic study.

PURPOSE: Whilst strong evidence supports rehabilitation to improve outcomes post-stroke, there is limited evidence to guide rehabilitation in the most severely disabled group. In an era of evidence-based practice, the aim of the study was to understand what factors guide physiotherapists (PTs) and occupational therapists (OTs) to select particular interventions in the rehabilitation of physical function after severely disabling stroke. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An ethnographic study was undertaken over an 18-month period involving five London, UK stroke services. Seventy-nine primary participants (30 PTs, 22 OTs, and 27 stroke survivors) were recruited to the study. Over 400 h of observation, 52 semi-structured interviews were conducted. Study data were analysed through thematic analysis. RESULTS: Key factors guiding therapist decision making were clinical expertise, professional role, stroke survivors' clinical presentation, therapist perspectives about stroke recovery, and clinical guidelines. Research evidence, stroke survivors' treatment preferences, organisational type, and pathway design were less influential factors. Therapy practice did not always address the physical needs of severely disabled stroke survivors. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple factors guided therapist decision making after severely disabling stroke. Alternative ways of therapist working should be considered to address the physical needs of severely disabled stroke survivors more fully.Implications for rehabilitationMultiple factors guide therapist decision making after severely disabling stroke, some of which result in the use of interventions that do not fully address stroke survivors' clinical needs.Therapists should critically reflect upon their personal beliefs and attitudes about severely disabling stroke to reduce potential sources of bias on decision making.Therapists should consider the timing and intensity of therapy delivery as well as their treatment approach to optimise outcomes after severely disabling stroke.

Lee Silverman voice treatment versus NHS speech and language therapy versus control for dysarthria in people with Parkinson's disease (PD COMM): pragmatic, UK based, multicentre, three arm, parallel group, unblinded, randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the clinical effectiveness of two speech and language therapy approaches versus no speech and language therapy for dysarthria in people with Parkinson's disease. DESIGN: Pragmatic, UK based, multicentre, three arm, parallel group, unblinded, randomised controlled trial. SETTING: The speech and language therapy interventions were delivered in outpatient or home settings between 26 September 2016 and 16 March 2020. PARTICIPANTS: 388 people with Parkinson's disease and dysarthria. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomly assigned to one of three groups (1:1:1): 130 to Lee Silverman voice treatment (LSVT LOUD), 129 to NHS speech and language therapy, and 129 to no speech and language therapy. LSVT LOUD consisted of four, face-to-face or remote, 50 min sessions each week delivered over four weeks. Home based practice activities were set for up to 5-10 mins daily on treatment days and 15 mins twice daily on non-treatment days. Dosage for the NHS speech and language therapy was determined by the local therapist in response to the participants' needs (estimated from prior research that NHS speech and language therapy participants would receive an average of one session per week over six to eight weeks). Local practices for NHS speech and language therapy were accepted, except for those within the LSVT LOUD protocol. Analyses were based on the intention to treat principle. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was total score at three months of self-reported voice handicap index. RESULTS: People who received LSVT LOUD reported lower voice handicap index scores at three months after randomisation than those who did not receive speech and language therapy (-8.0 points (99% confidence interval -13.3 to -2.6); P<0.001). No evidence suggests a difference in voice handicap index scores between NHS speech and language therapy and no speech and language therapy (1.7 points (-3.8 to 7.1); P=0.43). Patients in the LSVT LOUD group also reported lower voice handicap index scores than did those randomised to NHS speech and language therapy (-9.6 points (-14.9 to -4.4); P<0.001). 93 adverse events (predominately vocal strain) were reported in the LSVT LOUD group, 46 in the NHS speech and language therapy group, and none in the no speech and language therapy group. No serious adverse events were recorded. CONCLUSIONS: LSVT LOUD was more effective at reducing the participant reported impact of voice problems than was no speech and language therapy and NHS speech and language therapy. NHS speech and language therapy showed no evidence of benefit compared with no speech and language therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN registry ISRCTN12421382.

Occupational therapy for care home residents with stroke.

BACKGROUND: Stroke is a worldwide problem and is a leading cause of adult disability, resulting in dependency in activities of daily living (ADL) for around half of stroke survivors. It is estimated that up to 25% of all care home residents in the USA and in the UK have had a stroke. Stroke survivors who reside in care homes are likely to be more physically and cognitively impaired and therefore more dependent than those able to remain in their own home. Overall, 75% of care home residents are classified as severely disabled, and those with stroke are likely to have high levels of immobility, incontinence and confusion, as well as additional co-morbidities. It is not known whether this clinically complex population could benefit from occupational therapy in the same way as community-dwelling stroke survivors. The care home population with stroke differs from the general stroke population living at home, and a review was needed to examine the benefits of occupational therapy provided to this specific group. This review therefore focused on occupational therapy interventions for ADL for stroke survivors residing in care homes. OBJECTIVES: To measure the effects of occupational therapy interventions (provided directly by an occupational therapist or under the supervision of an occupational therapist) targeted at improving, restoring and maintaining independence in ADL among stroke survivors residing in long-term institutional care, termed collectively as 'care homes'. As a secondary objective, we aimed to evaluate occupational therapy interventions for reducing complications such as depression and low mood. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (August 2012), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, September 2012), MEDLINE (1948 to September 2012), EMBASE (1980 to September 2012), CINAHL (1982 to September 2012) and 10 additional bibliographic databases and six trials registers. We also handsearched seven journals, checked reference lists and obtained further information from individual trialists. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials investigating the impact of an occupational therapy intervention for care home residents with stroke versus standard care. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The lead review author performed all searches. Two review authors then independently assessed all titles and abstracts of studies and selected trials for inclusion, with a third review author resolving any discrepancies. The same two review authors independently extracted data from all included published sources to ensure reliability. Primary outcomes were performance in ADL at the end of scheduled follow-up and death or a poor outcome. Secondary outcomes aimed to reflect the domains targeted by an occupational therapy intervention. MAIN RESULTS: We included in the review one study involving 118 participants. We found one ongoing study that also met the inclusion criteria for the review, but the data were not yet available. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found insufficient evidence to support or refute the efficacy of occupational therapy interventions for improving, restoring or maintaining independence in ADL for stroke survivors residing in care homes. The effectiveness of occupational therapy for the population of stroke survivors residing in care homes remains unclear, and further research in this area is warranted.

Physiotherapy versus placebo or no intervention in Parkinson's disease.

BACKGROUND: Despite medical therapies and surgical interventions for Parkinson's disease (PD), patients develop progressive disability. Physiotherapy aims to maximise functional ability and minimise secondary complications through movement rehabilitation within a context of education and support for the whole person. The overall aim is to optimise independence, safety, and well-being, thereby enhancing quality of life. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of physiotherapy intervention compared with no intervention in patients with PD. SEARCH METHODS: We identified relevant trials by conducting electronic searches of numerous literature databases (e.g. MEDLINE, EMBASE) and trial registers, and by handsearching major journals, abstract books, conference proceedings, and reference lists of retrieved publications. The literature search included trials published up to the end of January 2012. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of physiotherapy intervention versus no physiotherapy intervention in patients with PD. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data from each article. We used standard meta-analysis methods to assess the effectiveness of physiotherapy intervention compared with no physiotherapy intervention. Trials were classified into the following intervention comparisons: general physiotherapy, exercise, treadmill training, cueing, dance, and martial arts. We used tests for heterogeneity to assess for differences in treatment effect across these different physiotherapy interventions. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 39 trials with 1827 participants. We considered the trials to be at a mixed risk of bias as the result of unreported allocation concealment and probable detection bias. Compared with no intervention, physiotherapy significantly improved the gait outcomes of speed (mean difference 0.04 m/s, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.02 to 0.06, P = 0.0002); two- or six-minute walk test (13.37 m, 95% CI 0.55 to 26.20, P = 0.04) and Freezing of Gait questionnaire (-1.41, 95% CI -2.63 to -0.19, P = 0.02); functional mobility and balance outcomes of Timed Up & Go test (-0.63 s, 95% CI -1.05 to -0.21, P = 0.003), Functional Reach Test (2.16 cm, 95% CI 0.89 to 3.43, P = 0.0008), and Berg Balance Scale (3.71 points, 95% CI 2.30 to 5.11, P < 0.00001); and clinician-rated disability using the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) (total -6.15 points, 95% CI-8.57 to -3.73, P < 0.00001; activities of daily living: -1.36, 95% CI -2.41 to -0.30, P = 0.01; and motor: -5.01, 95% CI -6.30 to -3.72, P < 0.00001). No difference between arms was noted in falls (Falls Efficacy Scale: -1.91 points, 95% CI -4.76 to 0.94, P = 0.19) or patient-rated quality of life (PDQ-39 Summary Index: -0.38 points, 95% CI -2.58 to 1.81, P = 0.73). One study reported that adverse events were rare; no other studies reported data on this outcome. Indirect comparisons of the different physiotherapy interventions revealed no evidence that the treatment effect differed across physiotherapy interventions for any of the outcomes assessed. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Benefit for physiotherapy was found in most outcomes over the short term (i.e. < 3 months) but was significant only for speed, two- or six-minute walk test, Freezing of Gait questionnaire, Timed Up & Go, Functional Reach Test, Berg Balance Scale, and clinician-rated UPDRS. Most of the observed differences between treatments were small. However, for some outcomes (e.g. speed, Berg Balance Scale, UPDRS), the differences observed were at, or approaching, what are considered minimal clinically important changes. These benefits should be interpreted with caution because the quality of most of the included trials was not high. Variation in measurements of outcome between studies meant that our analyses include a small proportion of the participants recruited.This review illustrates that a wide range of approaches are employed by physiotherapists to treat patients with PD. However, no evidence of differences in treatment effect was noted between the different types of physiotherapy interventions being used, although this was based on indirect comparisons. A consensus menu of 'best practice' physiotherapy is needed, as are large, well-designed randomised controlled trials undertaken to demonstrate the longer-term efficacy and cost-effectiveness of 'best practice' physiotherapy in PD.

Stroke in Sierra Leone: Case fatality rate and functional outcome after stroke in Freetown.

BACKGROUND: There is limited information on long-term outcomes after stroke in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Current estimates of case fatality rate (CFR) in SSA are based on small sample sizes with varying study design and report heterogeneous results. AIMS: We report CFR and functional outcomes from a large, prospective, longitudinal cohort of stroke patients in Sierra Leone and describe factors associated with mortality and functional outcome. METHODS: A prospective longitudinal stroke register was established at both adult tertiary government hospitals in Freetown, Sierra Leone. It recruited all patients ⩾ 18 years with stroke, using the World Health Organization definition, from May 2019 until October 2021. To reduce selection bias onto the register, all investigations were paid by the funder and outreach conducted to raise awareness of the study. Sociodemographic data, National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS), and Barthel Index (BI) were collected on all patients on admission, at 7 days, 90 days, 1 year, and 2 years post stroke. Cox proportional hazards models were constructed to identify factors associated with all-cause mortality. A binomial logistic regression model reports odds ratio (OR) for functional independence at 1 year. RESULTS: A total of 986 patients with stroke were included, of which 857 (87%) received neuroimaging. Follow-up rate was 82% at 1 year, missing item data were <1% for most variables. Stroke cases were equally split by sex and mean age was 58.9 (SD: 14.0) years. About 625 (63%) were ischemic, 206 (21%) primary intracerebral hemorrhage, 25 (3%) subarachnoid hemorrhage, and 130 (13%) were of undetermined stroke type. Median NIHSS was 16 (9-24). CFR at 30 days, 90 days, 1 year, and 2 years was 37%, 44%, 49%, and 53%, respectively. Factors associated with increased fatality at any timepoint were male sex (hazard ratio (HR): 1.28 (1.05-1.56)), previous stroke (HR: 1.34 (1.04-1.71)), atrial fibrillation (HR: 1.58(1.06-2.34)), subarachnoid hemorrhage (HR: 2.31 (1.40-3.81)), undetermined stroke type (HR: 3.18 (2.44-4.14)), and in-hospital complications (HR: 1.65 (1.36-1.98)). About 93% of patients were completely independent prior to their stroke, declining to 19% at 1 year after stroke. Functional improvement was most likely to occur between 7 and 90 days post stroke with 35% patients improving, and 13% improving between 90 days to 1 year. Increasing age (OR: 0.97 (0.95-0.99)), previous stroke (OR: 0.50 (0.26-0.98)), NIHSS (OR: 0.89 (0.86-0.91)), undetermined stroke type (OR: 0.18 (0.05-0.62)), and ⩾1 in-hospital complication (OR: 0.52 (0.34-0.80)) were associated with lower OR of functional independence at 1 year. Hypertension (OR: 1.98 (1.14-3.44)) and being the primary breadwinner of the household (OR: 1.59 (1.01-2.49)) were associated with functional independence at 1 year. CONCLUSION: Stroke affected younger people and resulted in high rates of fatality and functional impairment relative to global averages. Key clinical priorities for reducing fatality include preventing stroke-related complications through evidence-based stroke care, improved detection and management of atrial fibrillation, and increasing coverage of secondary prevention. Further research into care pathways and interventions to encourage care seeking for less severe strokes should be prioritized, including reducing the cost barrier for stroke investigations and care.

Speech and language therapy versus placebo or no intervention for speech problems in Parkinson's disease.

BACKGROUND: Parkinson's disease patients commonly suffer from speech and vocal problems including dysarthric speech, reduced loudness and loss of articulation. These symptoms increase in frequency and intensity with progression of the disease). Speech and language therapy (SLT) aims to improve the intelligibility of speech with behavioural treatment techniques or instrumental aids. OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy of speech and language therapy versus placebo or no intervention for speech and voice problems in patients with Parkinson's disease. SEARCH METHODS: Relevant trials were identified by electronic searches of numerous literature databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL, as well as handsearching of relevant conference abstracts and examination of reference lists in identified studies and other reviews. The literature search included trials published prior to 11(th) April 2011. SELECTION CRITERIA: Only randomised controlled trials (RCT) of speech and language therapy versus placebo or no intervention were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data were abstracted independently by CH and CT and differences settled by discussion. MAIN RESULTS: Three randomised controlled trials with a total of 63 participants were found comparing SLT with placebo for speech disorders in Parkinson's disease. Data were available from 41 participants in two trials. Vocal loudness for reading a passage increased by 6.3 dB (P = 0.0007) in one trial, and 11.0 dB (P = 0.0002) in another trial. An increase was also seen in both of these trials for monologue speaking of 5.4 dB (P = 0.002) and 11.0 dB (P = 0.0002), respectively. It is likely that these are clinically significant improvements. After six months, patients from the first trial were still showing a statistically significant increase of 4.5 dB (P = 0.0007) for reading and 3.5 dB for monologue speaking. Some measures of speech monotoni city and articulation were investigated; however, all these results were non-significant. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Although improvements in speech impairments were noted in these studies, due to the small number of patients examined, methodological flaws, and the possibility of publication bias, there is insufficient evidence to conclusively support or refute the efficacy of SLT for speech problems in Parkinson's disease. A large well designed placebo-controlled RCT is needed to demonstrate SLT's effectiveness in Parkinson's disease. The trial should conform to CONSORT guidelines. Outcome measures with particular relevance to patients with Parkinson's disease should be chosen and patients followed for at least six months to determine the duration of any improvement.

Comparison of speech and language therapy techniques for speech problems in Parkinson's disease.

BACKGROUND: Patients with Parkinson's disease commonly suffer from speech and voice difficulties such as impaired articulation and reduced loudness. Speech and language therapy (SLT) aims to improve the intelligibility of speech with behavioural treatment techniques or instrumental aids. OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy and effectiveness of novel SLT techniques versus a standard SLT approach to treat Parkinsonian speech problems. SEARCH METHODS: We identified relevant, published prior to 11(th) April 2011, by electronic searches of numerous literature databases including CENTRAL, MEDLINE and CINAHL, as well as handsearching relevant conference abstracts and examining reference lists in identified studies and other reviews. SELECTION CRITERIA: Only randomised controlled trials (RCT) of one type of speech and language therapy versus another were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data and resolved differences by discussion. MAIN RESULTS: Six trials involving 159 patients satisfied the inclusion criteria. Data could not be analysed from one trial due to changes in patient numbers and from a second because the data provided were not in a usable format. All trials reported intelligibility measures but a statistically significant result was only reported for the diagnostic rhyme test used in the study of Lee Silverman Voice Treatment -LOUD (LSVT-LOUD) versus a modified version of this therapy (LSVT-ARTIC). In this case a difference of 12.5 points (95% confidence interval (CI) -22.2 to -2.8; P = 0.01) between the mean changes in favour of the LSVT-LOUD group was reported for a speech sample overlaid with Babble noise; this difference was not reproduced for the two additional noise conditions under which the speech samples were assessed. LSVT-LOUD also outperformed LSVT-ARTIC and Respiration therapy (RT) in improving loudness, with a difference in reading a sample text of 5.0 dB (95%CI -8.3 to -1.7; P = 0.003) and 5.5 dB (95% CI 3.4 to 7.7; P < 0.00001) respectively, and a difference in monologue speech of 2.9 dB (95% CI 0.6 to 5.2; P = 0.01) versus RT. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Considering the small patient numbers in these trials, there is insufficient evidence to support or refute the efficacy of any form of SLT over another to treat speech problems in patients with Parkinson's disease.

Physiotherapy versus placebo or no intervention in Parkinson's disease.

BACKGROUND: Despite medical therapies and surgical interventions for Parkinson's disease (PD), patients develop progressive disability. The role of physiotherapy aims to maximise functional ability and minimise secondary complications through movement rehabilitation within a context of education and support for the whole person. The overall aim is to optimise independence, safety and well-being, thereby enhancing quality of life. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of physiotherapy intervention compared with no intervention in patients with PD. SEARCH METHODS: We identified relevant trials by electronic searches of numerous literature databases (e.g. MEDLINE, EMBASE) and trial registers, plus handsearching of major journals, abstract books, conference proceedings and reference lists of retrieved publications. The literature search included trials published up to end of December 2010. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of physiotherapy intervention versus no physiotherapy intervention in patients with PD. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data from each article. We used standard meta-analysis methods to assess the effectiveness of physiotherapy intervention compared with no physiotherapy intervention. Trials were classified into the following intervention comparisons: general physiotherapy, exercise, treadmill training, cueing, dance and martial arts. We used tests for heterogeneity to assess for differences in treatment effect across these different physiotherapy interventions. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 33 trials with 1518 participants. Compared with no-intervention, physiotherapy significantly improved the gait outcomes of velocity (mean difference 0.05 m/s, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.02 to 0.07, P = 0.0002), two- or six-minute walk test (16.40 m, CI: 1.90 to 30.90, P = 0.03) and step length (0.03 m, CI: 0 to 0.06, P = 0.04); functional mobility and balance outcomes of Timed Up & Go test (-0.61 s, CI: -1.06 to -0.17, P = 0.006), Functional Reach Test (2.16 cm, CI: 0.89 to 3.43, P = 0.0008) and Berg Balance Scale (3.36 points, CI: 1.91 to 4.81, P < 0.00001); and clinician-rated disability using the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) (total: -4.46 points, CI -7.16 to -1.75, P = 0.001; activities of daily living: -1.36, CI -2.41 to -0.30, P = 0.01; and motor: -4.09, CI: -5.59 to -2.59, P < 0.00001). There was no difference between arms in falls or patient-rated quality of life. Indirect comparisons of the different physiotherapy interventions found no evidence that the treatment effect differed across the physiotherapy interventions for any of the outcomes assessed. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Benefit for physiotherapy was found in most outcomes over the short-term (i.e. < three months), but was only significant for velocity, two- or six-minute walk test, step length, Timed Up & Go, Functional Reach Test, Berg Balance Scale and clinician-rated UPDRS. Most of the observed differences between the treatments were small. However, for some outcomes (e.g. velocity, Berg Balance Scale and UPDRS), the differences observed were at, or approaching, what are considered minimally clinical important changes.The review illustrates that a wide range of approaches are employed by physiotherapists to treat PD. However, there was no evidence of differences in treatment effect between the different types of physiotherapy interventions being used, though this was based on indirect comparisons. There is a need to develop a consensus menu of 'best-practice' physiotherapy, and to perform large well-designed randomised controlled trials to demonstrate the longer-term efficacy and cost-effectiveness of 'best practice' physiotherapy in PD.

Physiotherapy versus placebo or no intervention in Parkinson's disease.

BACKGROUND: Despite medical therapies and surgical interventions for Parkinson's disease (PD), patients develop progressive disability. The role of physiotherapy aims to maximise functional ability and minimise secondary complications through movement rehabilitation within a context of education and support for the whole person. The overall aim is to optimise independence, safety and well-being, thereby enhancing quality of life. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of physiotherapy intervention compared with no intervention in patients with PD. SEARCH METHODS: We identified relevant trials by electronic searches of numerous literature databases (e.g. MEDLINE, EMBASE) and trial registers, plus handsearching of major journals, abstract books, conference proceedings and reference lists of retrieved publications. The literature search included trials published up to end of December 2010. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of physiotherapy intervention versus no physiotherapy intervention in patients with PD. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data from each article. We used standard meta-analysis methods to assess the effectiveness of physiotherapy intervention compared with no physiotherapy intervention. Trials were classified into the following intervention comparisons: general physiotherapy, exercise, treadmill training, cueing, dance and martial arts. We used tests for heterogeneity to assess for differences in treatment effect across these different physiotherapy interventions. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 33 trials with 1518 participants. Compared with no-intervention, physiotherapy significantly improved the gait outcomes of velocity (mean difference 0.05 m/s, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.02 to 0.07, P = 0.0002), two- or six-minute walk test (16.40 m, CI: 1.90 to 30.90, P = 0.03) and step length (0.03 m, CI: 0 to 0.06, P = 0.04); functional mobility and balance outcomes of Timed Up & Go test (-0.61 s, CI: -1.06 to -0.17, P = 0.006), Functional Reach Test (2.16 cm, CI: 0.89 to 3.43, P = 0.0008) and Berg Balance Scale (3.36 points, CI: 1.91 to 4.81, P < 0.00001); and clinician-rated disability using the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) (total: -4.46 points, CI -7.16 to -1.75, P = 0.001; activities of daily living: -1.36, CI -2.41 to -0.30, P = 0.01; and motor: -4.09, CI: -5.59 to -2.59, P < 0.00001). There was no difference between arms in falls or patient-rated quality of life. Indirect comparisons of the different physiotherapy interventions found no evidence that the treatment effect differed across the physiotherapy interventions for any of the outcomes assessed. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Benefit for physiotherapy was found in most outcomes over the short-term (i.e. < three months), but was only significant for velocity, two- or six-minute walk test, step length, Timed Up & Go, Functional Reach Test, Berg Balance Scale and clinician-rated UPDRS. Most of the observed differences between the treatments were small. However, for some outcomes (e.g. velocity, Berg Balance Scale and UPDRS), the differences observed were at, or approaching, what are considered minimally clinical important changes.The review illustrates that a wide range of approaches are employed by physiotherapists to treat PD. However, there was no evidence of differences in treatment effect between the different types of physiotherapy interventions being used, though this was based on indirect comparisons. There is a need to develop a consensus menu of 'best-practice' physiotherapy, and to perform large well-designed randomised controlled trials to demonstrate the longer-term efficacy and cost-effectiveness of 'best practice' physiotherapy in PD.

Comparison of postdischarge physiotherapy versus usual care following primary total knee arthroplasty for osteoarthritis: an exploratory pilot randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a pilot trial of a postdischarge physiotherapy intervention to improve patient function versus usual physiotherapy in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty aiming to assess: recruitment rate, feasibility and acceptability of the intervention and control, suitability of outcomes, retention and adverse events and to inform sample size calculation for a definitive trial. DESIGN: Exploratory pilot randomized controlled trial using independent assessment. SETTING: Mixed urban and rural, UK. PARTICIPANTS: Patients undergoing primary, elective unilateral knee arthroplasty for osteoarthritis. INTERVENTION: Two additional home physiotherapy visits of functional weight-bearing exercises, functional task-specific training versus treatment as usual. MAIN OUTCOME: Oxford Knee Score at 12 months. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: completion rates, adverse events, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, leg extensor power, timed 10-m walk, timed sit-to-stand, resource use diaries. Assessments completed at baseline (pre-operatively), 3, 6 and 12 months. RESULTS: Of 181 eligible participants 107 (59.1%) were randomized over 13 months, one participant withdrew, no adverse events. Intervention group n = 56 (mean age 67.8), control group n = 51 (mean age 70.8). The difference in mean change of Oxford Knee Scores between groups (intervention--control) at 12 months was 0.2 (95% confidence interval (CI) -3.8, 4.2), P = 0.94. Patient diaries revealed non-trial additional physiotherapy requires improved measurement. CONCLUSIONS: Successful recruitment and retention rates were achieved. The intervention appeared feasible and acceptable but may be suboptimal in intensity given recent research. A sample size of 1271 participants would be required for a fully powered randomized controlled trial using the main outcome. However new outcomes, potentially of greater validity and responsiveness, require consideration.

A systematic review of the efficiency of recruitment to stroke rehabilitation randomised controlled trials.

INTRODUCTION: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that fail to meet their recruitment target risk increasing research waste. Acute stroke RCTs experience notable recruitment issues. The efficiency of recruitment to stroke rehabilitation RCTs has not been explored. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To explore recruitment efficiency and the trial features associated with efficient recruitment to stroke rehabilitation RCTs. METHODS: A systematic review of stroke rehabilitation RCTs published between 2005 and 2015 identified in a search of the Cochrane Stroke Group (CSG) Trials Register from 35 electronic databases (e.g. Medline, CINAHL; EMBASE), clinical trial registers, and hand-searching. Inclusion criteria are stroke rehabilitation intervention, delivered by a member of the rehabilitation team, and clinically relevant environment. We extracted data on recruitment efficiency and trial features. RESULTS: We screened 12,939 titles, 1270 abstracts and 788 full texts, before extracting data from 512 included RCTs (n = 28,804 stroke survivor participants). This is the largest systematic review of recruitment to date. A third of stroke survivors screened consented to participate (median 34% (IQR 14-61), on average sites recruited 1.5 participants per site per month (IQR 0.71-3.22), and one in twenty (6% (IQR 0-13) dropped out during the RCT. Almost half (48%) of those screened in the community were recruited compared to hospital settings (27%). Similarly, almost half (47%) those screened at least 6 months after stroke participated, compared to 23% of stroke survivors screened within a month of stroke. When one recruiter screened multiple sites, a median of one stroke survivor was recruited every 2 months compared to more than two per month when there was a dedicated recruiter per site. RCT recruitment was significantly faster per site, with fewer dropouts, for trials conducted in Asia (almost three stroke survivors monthly; 2% dropout) compared to European trials (approximately one stroke survivor monthly; 7% dropout). CONCLUSIONS: One third of stroke survivors screened were randomised to rehabilitation RCTs at a rate of between one and two per month, per site. One in twenty did not complete the trial. Our findings will inform recruitment plans of future stroke rehabilitation RCTs. Limited reporting of recruitment details restricted the subgroup analysis performed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews, registration number CRD42016033067.

Effectiveness of physiotherapy exercise following hip arthroplasty for osteoarthritis: a systematic review of clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Physiotherapy has long been a routine component of patient rehabilitation following hip joint replacement. The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate the effectiveness of physiotherapy exercise after discharge from hospital on function, walking, range of motion, quality of life and muscle strength, for osteoarthritic patients following elective primary total hip arthroplasty. DESIGN: Systematic review, using the Cochrane Collaboration Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and the Quorom Statement. Database searches: AMED, CINAHL, EMBASE, KingsFund, MEDLINE, Cochrane library (Cochrane reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, DARE), PEDro, The Department of Health National Research Register. Handsearches: Physiotherapy, Physical Therapy, Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (Britain) Conference Proceedings. No language restrictions were applied. SELECTION: Trials comparing physiotherapy exercise versus usual/standard care, or comparing two types of relevant exercise physiotherapy, following discharge from hospital after elective primary total hip replacement for osteoarthritis were reviewed. OUTCOMES: Functional activities of daily living, walking, quality of life, muscle strength and range of hip joint motion. Trial quality was extensively evaluated. Narrative synthesis plus meta-analytic summaries were performed to summarise the data. RESULTS: 8 trials were identified. Trial quality was mixed. Generally poor trial quality, quantity and diversity prevented explanatory meta-analyses. The results were synthesised and meta-analytic summaries were used where possible to provide a formal summary of results. Results indicate that physiotherapy exercise after discharge following total hip replacement has the potential to benefit patients. CONCLUSION: Insufficient evidence exists to establish the effectiveness of physiotherapy exercise following primary hip replacement for osteoarthritis. Further well designed trials are required to determine the value of post discharge exercise following this increasingly common surgical procedure.