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.

Monday, December 2, 2024

Effectiveness of early vocational rehabilitation versus usual care to support RETurn to work After stroKE: a pragmatic, parallel arm multi-centre, randomised-controlled trial

 The simplest way to get survivors back to work is EXACT 100% RECOVERY PROTOCOLS! And you blithering idiots don't know that! Doesn't anyone in stroke know how to think?

Effectiveness of early vocational rehabilitation versus usual care to support RETurn to work After stroKE: a pragmatic, parallel arm multi-centre, randomised-controlled trial

Abstract

Background

Return-to-work is a major goal achieved by fewer than 50% stroke survivors. Evidence on how to support return-to-work is lacking.

Aims

To evaluate the clinical effectiveness of Early Stroke Specialist Vocational Rehabilitation (ESSVR) plus usual care (UC) (i.e. usual NHS rehabilitation) versus UC alone for helping people return-to-work after stroke.

Methods

This pragmatic, multicentre, individually randomised controlled trial with embedded economic and process evaluations, compared ESSVR with UC in 21 NHS stroke services across England and Wales. Eligible participants were aged ≥18 years, in work at stroke onset, hospitalised with new stroke and within 12-weeks of stroke. People not intending to return-to-work were excluded. Participants were randomised (5:4) to individually-tailored ESSVR delivered by stroke-specialist occupational-therapists for up to 12-months or usual National Health Service rehabilitation. Primary outcome was self-reported return-to-work for ≥2 hours per week at 12-months. Primary and safety analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population.

Results

Between 1st June-2018, and 7th March-2022, 583 participants (mean age 54.1 years [SD 11.0], 69% male) were randomised to ESSVR (n=324) or UC (n=259). Primary outcome data were available for 454(77.9%) participants. Intention-to-treat analysis showed no evidence of a difference in the proportion of participants returned-to-work at 12-months (165/257[64.2%] ESSVR vs 117/197[59.4%] UC; adjusted odds ratio 1.12 [95%CI 0.8 to 1.87],p=0.3582). There was some indication that older participants and those with more post-stroke impairment were more likely to benefit from ESSVR (interaction p=0.0239 and p=0.0959 respectively).

Conclusions

To our knowledge, this is the largest trial of a stroke VR intervention ever conducted. We found no evidence that ESSVR conferred any benefits over UC in improving return-to-work rates 12-months post-stroke. Return-to-work (for at least 2 hours per week) rates were higher than in previous studies (64.2% ESSVR versus 59.4% UC) at 12-months and more than double that observed in our feasibility trial (26%). Interpretation of findings was limited by a predominantly mild-moderate sample of participants and the Covid-19 pandemic. The pandemic impacted the trial, ESSVR and UC delivery, altering the work environment and employer behaviour. These changes influenced our primary outcome and the meaning of work in people’s lives; all pivotal to the context of ESSVR delivery and its mechanisms of action.

Data access:

Data available on reasonable request.

Registration:

ISRCTN12464275.

Get full access to this article

No comments:

Post a Comment