Predicting motor recovery of the upper limb after stroke rehabilitation: value of a clinical examination

 

 Do you not understand, prediction is completely useless for stroke survivors? It does nothing to get them recovered. There are a lot of mentors and senior researchers that need to be re-educated on the purpose of stroke research. The only goal in stroke is 100% recovery; not biomarkers, prediction, prognosis or other useless shit! I'd fire all of you for incompetence!

Predicting motor recovery of the upper limb after stroke rehabilitation: value of a clinical examination

2000, Physiotherapy Research International

Abstract

Background and Purpose. 

Only a few studies have been conducted to predict motor recovery of the arm after stroke. The aims of this study were to identify which clinical variables, assessed at different points in time, were predictive of motor recovery, and to construct useful regression equations. Method. One hundred consecutive stroke patients who had an obvious motor deficit of the upper limb were evaluated on entry to the study (two to five weeks post-stroke) and at two, six and 12 months after stroke. The Brunnström-Fugl-Meyer test was used as the outcome measure. Predictors included demographic data, overall disability, clinical neurological features, neuropsychological factors and secondary shoulder complications. Results. In multiple regression analyses, motor performance was invariably retained as the predictive factor with the highest R-square. Other significant predictive variables were overall disability, muscle tone, proprioception and hemi-inattention. Between 53% and 89% of the total amount of variance was accounted for in all selected models. The accuracy of prediction from clinical measurement in the acute phase diminished as the time span of measurement of outcome increased. Similarly, assessment of the variables at two and six months, rather than in the acute stage, resulted in a considerable improvement in the percentage variance explained at 12 months. The highest accuracy was obtained when predictions were made step-by-step in time. 

Conclusions. 

It is possible to predict motor recovery of the upper limb accurately through the use of a few clinical measures. Predictive equations are proposed, the use of which are practicable in both clinical practice and research.(Why the fuck do this? It won't get survivors recovered, will it? But it did get you published, so there's that; that doesn't help survivors, does it?)

FIGURE 1: Mean (SD) of the scores on the Brunnstrém—Fugel-Meyer test at baseline and at two, six and 12 months post-stroke. Figure 1 shows the means and standard deviations of the scores on the Brunnstr6m—Fugl-Meyer test at four measurement points. Mean initial score on the Brunnstrém-Fugl-Meyer test was 14 and increased to 33.8 at 12 months post-stroke. Figure 1 also demonstrates high standard deviations, which increase over time. Mean improvement on the Brunnstrém—Fugl-Meyer test between baseline and two months was 9.1 points. Between two and six months and six and 12 months post- stroke, the improvement was, respectively, 6.7 and 4.0. Prediction of motor recoveryTABLE 1: Significant correlation coefficients between predictor variables measured at baseline and motor recovery of the upper limb at two, six and 12 months post-stroke.* *Between predictor variables measured at two months and motor recovery of the upper limb at six and 12 months post-stroke and between predictor variables measured at six months and motor recovery of the upper limb at 12 months post-stroke.