Deans' stroke musings: New Technologies for Stroke Rehabilitation

Changing stroke rehab and research worldwide now.Time is Brain! trillions and trillions of neurons that DIE each day because there are NO effective hyperacute therapies besides tPA(only 12% effective). I have 523 posts on hyperacute therapy, enough for researchers to spend decades proving them out. These are my personal ideas and blog on stroke rehabilitation and stroke research. Do not attempt any of these without checking with your medical provider. Unless you join me in agitating, when you need these therapies they won't be there.

What this blog is for:

My blog is not to help survivors recover, it is to have the 10 million yearly stroke survivors light fires underneath their doctors, stroke hospitals and stroke researchers to get stroke solved. 100% recovery. The stroke medical world is completely failing at that goal, they don't even have it as a goal. Shortly after getting out of the hospital and getting NO information on the process or protocols of stroke rehabilitation and recovery I started searching on the internet and found that no other survivor received useful information. This is an attempt to cover all stroke rehabilitation information that should be readily available to survivors so they can talk with informed knowledge to their medical staff. It lays out what needs to be done to get stroke survivors closer to 100% recovery. It's quite disgusting that this information is not available from every stroke association and doctors group.

Tuesday, January 15, 2013

New Technologies for Stroke Rehabilitation

These 2 pages don't really tell us anything new. But it does show an incredibly bad case of thinking only in your own silo.
http://scholar.google.com/scholar_url?hl=en&q=http://downloads.hindawi.com/journals/srt/aip/815814.pdf&sa=X&scisig=AAGBfm2IaBx6ZydMRbYx8oICgpg5HOWUeg&oi=scholaralrt
These observations result in line with the proposal to change the research question from “is a specific technology effective?” into “how may I use this technology in an effective way?” as suggested by Iosa [5] and “for which patients is this technology effective” as suggested by Morone [6]. Robotic devices, for example, were shown to be more effective for severely affected patients, whereas rehabilitative outcomes after robotic training resulted similar to those of conventional manual therapy for moderately affected patients.

The bolded questions really needs to be changed to; How do I get patients to not need this type of therapy or technology?

The answer to that is to reduce the damage of the stroke by applying hyperacute therapies that stop the neuronal cascade of death.