http://bjo.sagepub.com/content/early/2016/09/10/0308022616664910.abstract
- 1Lecturer, MSc Occupational Therapy Programme, Clinical Therapies, University of Limerick, Republic of Ireland
- 2Senior Lecturer, Rehabilitation, Teaching and Research Unit, University of Otago, New Zealand
- 3Lecturer, Centre for Health, Activity and Rehabilitation Research, School of Physiotherapy, University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand
- Pauline Boland, University of Otago Wellington, Rehabilitation, Teaching and Research Unit, University of Otago, Newtown, Wellington 6242, New Zealand. Email: pauline.boland@ul.ie
Abstract
Introduction The aim
of this scoping review was to examine and synthesise literature on
adaptive equipment use for personal care and mobility
after stroke.
Method We searched databases including Medline, EMBASE, AMED, CINAHL and Scopus to February 2016. Two authors independently screened
789 titles, identifying 28 studies for inclusion in the review.
Results Findings were
grouped into four themes: (1) stroke-specific impairments and
consequences for equipment use and training;
(2) meaning of equipment for people with stroke;
(3) cost of equipment after stroke; and (4) conflicts between equipment
provision
and models of stroke rehabilitation.
Conclusion The wide
range of impairments after stroke increases complexity of how people use
equipment. Nonetheless, training needs
and the relationship between social context,
identity and equipment use are increasingly better understood,. The
findings
highlight a tension between practice that seeks
to re-train function by ‘normal’ movement without equipment and
restoration
of function by using compensation strategies
involving use of equipment. However, there is no evidence that
compensation strategies
impede recovery of physical abilities.???!!!
High-quality evidence about costs of equipment after stroke, which could
inform policy
decisions, is urgently needed.
No comments:
Post a Comment