http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10749357.2016.1176796
Abstract
Gait
rehabilitation is a major component of stroke rehabilitation, and is
supported by extensive research. The objective of this review was to
examine the external validity of intervention studies aimed at improving
gait in individuals post-stroke. To that end, two aspects of these
studies were assessed: subjects’ exclusion criteria and the ecological
validity of the intervention, as manifested by the intervention’s
technological complexity and delivery setting. Additionally, we examined
whether the target population as inferred from the titles/abstracts is
broader than the population actually represented by the reported
samples.
Methods: We systematically
researched PubMed for intervention studies to improve gait post-stroke,
working backwards from the beginning of 2014. Exclusion criteria, the
technological complexity of the intervention (defined as either
elaborate or simple), setting, and description of the target population
in the titles/abstracts were recorded.
Results:
Fifty-two studies were reviewed. The samples were exclusive, with
recurrent stroke, co-morbidities, cognitive status, walking level, and
residency being major reasons for exclusion. In one half of the studies,
the intervention was elaborate. Descriptions of participants in the
title/abstract in almost one half of the studies included only the
diagnosis (stroke or comparable terms) and its stage (acute, subacute,
and chronic).
Conclusions: The external
validity of a substantial number of intervention studies about
rehabilitation of gait post-stroke appears to be limited by exclusivity
of the samples as well as by deficiencies in ecological validity of the
interventions. These limitations are not accurately reflected in the
titles or abstracts of the studies.
No comments:
Post a Comment