While this is a worthwhile study this person should have realized that therapy after the fact needs to be avoided at all costs. The therapy works poorly and needs to be avoided. One of the main ways to do that is to prevent the neuronal cascade of death. Then the focus could be on neurogenesis and stem cells to replace the dead area.
Doesn't anyone think through what needs to completely change for stroke rehab?
http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/compsci705s1c/exams/SeminarReports/Final%20Report%20epen234.pdf
Full 4 pages at the link.
ABSTRACT
Strokes are a leading cause of death and disability and have been described as a “worldwide epidemic” [5]. Strokes cause disability, partial paralysis and leave up to 85% of their victims with some form of motor impairment. Stroke rehabilitation starts as soon as possible and involves repetitive movement which people find repetitive and boring. A study [1] has found that as few as 31% of people complete their exercises as recommended. Adding to this the high cost of one on one therapy and transport to see specialists, stroke rehabilitation is a major problem. Games have been trialed for stroke rehabilitation to increase patient motivation and reduce costs. This literature review aims to find out to what extent games have therapeutic value and further, what characteristics make a good game for stroke rehabilitation. We find that in order for a game to be successful it must be based on solid therapeutic principles as well as game design principles including “challenge” and “meaningful feedback”. Different hardware and software can be used as long as it follows game design principles to encourage patients to perform therapeutic exercises. Games must also take into account the low morale of recent stroke victims and avoid discouraging beginners.
Dean: Although preventing further destruction at the stroke phase is the best place for preventing disability to start, it's the disabled survivors' recovery many researchers are interested in because we are the expensive, nearly visible ones. Most research/anything comes down to money ... there are a lot more dollars in recovery solutions than in disability prevention - although the latter would save many orders of magnitude more money. Is it possible that people are short-sighted?
ReplyDeleteAnother example: Why would an insulin pump manufacturer spend money on a type 1 diabetes cure when that would kill their own income stream?
Another reason for single-payer. Single-payer would have an incentive to prevent the expensive interventions. I can hope.
ReplyDelete