Will you please stop with this fucking useless research on predicting failure to recover! And just do what survivors want! EXACT 100% RECOVERY PROTOCOLS! I 'd have you all fired.
Clinical Predictors for Upper Limb Recovery after Stroke
Rehabilitation: Retrospective Cohort Study
Healthcare 2023, 11, 335. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare11030335 www.mdpi.com/journal/healthcare
Article
Clinical Predictors for Upper Limb Recovery after Stroke
Rehabilitation: Retrospective Cohort Study
Silvia Salvalaggio 1,2 , Luisa Cacciante 1, *, Lorenza Maistrello 3 and Andrea Turolla 4,5
1 Laboratory of Healthcare Innovation Technology, IRCCS San Camillo Hospital, Via Alberoni 70,
30126 Venice, Italy
2 Padova Neuroscience Center, Università degli Studi di Padova, Via Orus 2/B, 35131 Padova, Italy
3 IRCCS San Camillo Hospital, Via Alberoni 70, 30126 Venice, Italy
4 Department of Biomedical and Neuromotor Sciences–DIBINEM, Alma Mater Studiorum Università
di Bologna, Via Massarenti 9, 40138 Bologna, Italy
5 Unit of Occupational Medicine, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Via Pelagio Palagi 9,
40138 Bologna, Italy
* Correspondence: luisa.cacciante@hsancamillo.it; Tel.: +39-0412207521
Article
Clinical Predictors for Upper Limb Recovery after Stroke
Rehabilitation: Retrospective Cohort Study
Silvia Salvalaggio 1,2 , Luisa Cacciante 1, *, Lorenza Maistrello 3 and Andrea Turolla 4,5
1 Laboratory of Healthcare Innovation Technology, IRCCS San Camillo Hospital, Via Alberoni 70,
30126 Venice, Italy
2 Padova Neuroscience Center, Università degli Studi di Padova, Via Orus 2/B, 35131 Padova, Italy
3 IRCCS San Camillo Hospital, Via Alberoni 70, 30126 Venice, Italy
4 Department of Biomedical and Neuromotor Sciences–DIBINEM, Alma Mater Studiorum Università
di Bologna, Via Massarenti 9, 40138 Bologna, Italy
5 Unit of Occupational Medicine, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Via Pelagio Palagi 9,
40138 Bologna, Italy
* Correspondence: luisa.cacciante@hsancamillo.it; Tel.: +39-0412207521
Abstract:
After stroke, recovery of upper limb (UL) motor function is enhanced by a high dose of
rehabilitation and is supposed to be supported by attentive functions. However, their mutual
influence during rehabilitation is not well known yet. The aim of this retrospective observational
cohort study was to investigate the association between rehabilitation dose and motor and cognitive
functions, during UL motor recovery. Inpatients with first unilateral stroke, without time
restrictions from onset, and undergoing at least 15 h of rehabilitation were enrolled. Data on dose
and modalities of rehabilitation received, together with motor and cognitive outcomes before and
after therapy, were collected. Fugl–Meyer values for the Upper Extremity were the primary outcome
measure. Logistic regression models were used to detect any associations between UL motor
improvement and motor and cognitive-linguistic features at acceptance, regarding dose of
rehabilitation received. Thirty-five patients were enrolled and received 80.57 ± 30.1 h of
rehabilitation on average. Manual dexterity, level of independence and UL motor function
improved after rehabilitation, with no influence of attentive functions on motor recovery. The total
amount of rehabilitation delivered was the strongest factor (p = 0.031) influencing the recovery of
UL motor function after stroke, whereas cognitive-linguistic characteristics were not found to
influence UL motor gains.
rehabilitation and is supposed to be supported by attentive functions. However, their mutual
influence during rehabilitation is not well known yet. The aim of this retrospective observational
cohort study was to investigate the association between rehabilitation dose and motor and cognitive
functions, during UL motor recovery. Inpatients with first unilateral stroke, without time
restrictions from onset, and undergoing at least 15 h of rehabilitation were enrolled. Data on dose
and modalities of rehabilitation received, together with motor and cognitive outcomes before and
after therapy, were collected. Fugl–Meyer values for the Upper Extremity were the primary outcome
measure. Logistic regression models were used to detect any associations between UL motor
improvement and motor and cognitive-linguistic features at acceptance, regarding dose of
rehabilitation received. Thirty-five patients were enrolled and received 80.57 ± 30.1 h of
rehabilitation on average. Manual dexterity, level of independence and UL motor function
improved after rehabilitation, with no influence of attentive functions on motor recovery. The total
amount of rehabilitation delivered was the strongest factor (p = 0.031) influencing the recovery of
UL motor function after stroke, whereas cognitive-linguistic characteristics were not found to
influence UL motor gains.
No comments:
Post a Comment