Deans' stroke musings

Changing stroke rehab and research worldwide now.Time is Brain!Just think of all the trillions and trillions of neurons that DIE each day because there are NO effective hyperacute therapies besides tPA(only 12% effective). I have 493 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:

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's quite disgusting that this information is not available from every stroke association and doctors group.
My back ground story is here:http://oc1dean.blogspot.com/2010/11/my-background-story_8.html

Friday, July 14, 2017

Functional recovery differences after stroke rehabilitation in patients with uni- or bilateral hemiparesis

I see no use whatsoever from this research in getting survivors to 100% recovery.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28678212

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

To examine the functional recovery differences after stroke rehabilitation in patients with uni- or bilateral hemiparesis.

METHODS:

In this retrospective study, we included data from the medical record of all 383 patients with uni- or bilateral hemiparesis after stroke who were admitted to King Fahad Medical City-Rehabilitation Hospital between 2008 and 2014 in Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. According to the site of hemiparesis, we classified patients into 3 groups: right hemiparesis (n=208), left hemiparesis (n=157), and bilateral hemipareses (n=18). The patients (n=49) who did not have either site of hemiparesis were excluded. The Functional Independence Measures (FIM) instrument was used to assess the score at admission and discharge. A post hoc test was conducted to examine the functional recovery differences between groups. Multiple regression analyses were used to confirm the findings.

RESULTS:

Amongst the three groups, there were significant (p<0.05) differences in the total-FIM score as well as motor- and cognitive-FIM sub-scores between admission and discharge of stroke rehabilitation. The differences were significantly greater in the bilateral hemipareses group than in either unilateral hemiparesis group. Multiple regression analyses also confirmed that the site of hemiparesis significantly (p<0.05) differs in the total-FIM score as well as motor-FIM and cognitive-FIM sub-scores.

CONCLUSION:

Our results demonstrate that differences in functional recovery after stroke rehabilitation may be influenced by the site of hemiparesis after stroke.

No comments:

Post a Comment