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.

Wednesday, September 23, 2020

In search of Kipling’s six honest serving men in upper limb rehabilitation: within participant case-crossover experiment nested within a web-based questionnaire

Notice exactly how fucking bad this is. Therapists don't have protocols and think
30- to 60-min per day as the optimal dose to provide. With 85% of time is spent in bed not moving you will never recover on 60 minutes a day. Your therapists should have protocols on all these you can do without a therapist present;


In search of Kipling’s six honest serving men in upper limb rehabilitation: within participant case-crossover experiment nested within a web-based questionnaire

Received 13 Jan 2020, Accepted 24 Aug 2020, Published online: 22 Sep 2020

Purpose

In search of Kipling’s six honest serving men in upper limb rehabilitation after stroke, we sought to investigate clinicians’ perspective of when and where to begin therapy, how much and what therapy to provide, and who and why (or not) to provide therapy.

Materials & methods: Within-participant case cross-over experiments were nested within an anonymous web-based questionnaire (21 questions, three cases). Graph theory-based voting to produce ranked ordered lists and mixed-effect logistic regression were performed.

Results

In total, 225 Australian stroke clinicians responded: 53% occupational therapists, 61% working in acute/inpatient stroke setting. Most respondents indicated they did not have a protocol/expectation regarding when (62%), how much (84%) or what (60%) therapy to provide in their setting. Respondents ranked 24-h to 7-days post-stroke as the optimal time to commence therapy, and 30- to 60-min per day as the optimal dose to provide. Within-participant experiments demonstrated that greater motor recovery as time progressed increased the odds of offering therapy, while lack of motor recovery, shoulder pain, neurological decline and sole therapist reduced the odds.

Conclusion

We need to develop an evidence base concerning Kipling’s six honest serving men and equip clinicians with clinical decision-making skills aligned with this focus.

  • IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATION

  • Most clinicians did not have access to a protocol / clinical pathway which defines when, how much and what upper limb therapy to provide after stroke, which may be improved by providing individual clinicians with organisational support to make therapy decisions.

  • To improve the personalisation of upper limb rehabilitation in clinical practice, we need to understand when and where after stroke to begin therapy, how much and what therapy to provide, as well as who and why (clinical decision-making) to provide therapy.

  • Clinicians perceive clinical trials as successful if the therapy can demonstrate recovery that is greater than a minimal clinical important difference (MCID).

 

No comments:

Post a Comment