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.

Thursday, March 8, 2018

Systematic review of clinical practice guidelines to identify recommendations for rehabilitation after stroke and other acquired brain injuries

What a fucking waste. GUIDELINES not RESULTS! Does no one understand that survivors want results NOT lazy guidelines? This should already be out there in that publicly available database of stroke protocols.
http://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/8/2/e018791 
  1. Laura Jolliffe
1,
  • Natasha A Lannin
  • 1,2,3,
  • Dominique A Cadilhac
  • ,5,
  • Tammy Hoffmann
  • 6

    Author affiliations

    Discipline of Occupational Therapy, School of Allied Health, College of Science, Health and Engineering, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Australia

  • Occupational Therapy Department, Alfred Health, Prahran, Australia
  • John Walsh Centre for Rehabilitation Research, Sydney Medical School (Northern), The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
  • Stroke and Ageing Research, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Monash University, Clayton, Australia
  • The Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Australia
  • Centre for Research in Evidence-Based Practice, Faculty of Health Sciences and Medicine, Bond University, Gold Coast, Australia

    1. Correspondence to
    Dr Natasha A Lannin; n.lannin@latrobe.edu.au

    Abstract

    Objectives Rehabilitation clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) contain recommendation statements aimed at optimising care for adults with stroke and other brain injury. The aim of this study was to determine the quality, scope and consistency of CPG recommendations for rehabilitation covering the acquired brain injury populations.
    Design Systematic review.
    Interventions Included CPGs contained recommendations for inpatient rehabilitation or community rehabilitation for adults with an acquired brain injury diagnosis (stroke, traumatic or other non-progressive acquired brain impairments). Electronic databases (n=2), guideline organisations (n=4) and websites of professional societies (n=17) were searched up to November 2017. Two independent reviewers used the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument, and textual syntheses were used to appraise and compare recommendations.
    Results From 427 papers screened, 20 guidelines met the inclusion criteria. Only three guidelines were rated high (>75%) across all domains of AGREE-II; highest rated domains were ‘scope and purpose’ (85.1, SD 18.3) and ‘clarity’ (76.2%, SD 20.5). Recommendations for assessment and for motor therapies were most commonly reported, however, varied in the level of detail across guidelines.
    Conclusion Rehabilitation CPGs were consistent in scope, suggesting little difference in rehabilitation approaches between vascular and traumatic brain injury. There was, however, variability in included studies and methodological quality.
    PROSPERO registration number CRD42016026936.
    This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

    No comments:

    Post a Comment