Of course everything is unclear in stroke. Nobody has written up ANY STROKE PROTOCOLS.
Effects of different rehabilitation provision systems on functional recovery in patients with subacute stroke
This article has been accepted for publication and undergone full peer review but has not been through the copyediting, typesetting, pagination and proofreading process, which may lead to differences between this version and the Version of Record. Please cite this article as doi: 10.1002/pmrj.12689.
Abstract
Introduction
The extent of rehabilitation is a key element in promoting functional recovery in patients with stroke. However, the type of rehabilitation therapy that should be provided to improve functional outcomes remains unclear.
Objective
This study aimed to compare the effects of three different rehabilitation provision systems, namely conventional rehabilitation therapy, conventional rehabilitation therapy plus physical therapy (PT) on weekends, and conventional rehabilitation therapy plus PT and occupational therapy (OT) on weekends, on functional recovery in patients with subacute stroke.
Design
Retrospective observational cohort study.
Setting
Convalescence Rehabilitation Hospital.
Patients
Three hundred and one patients with subacute stroke (mean age, 69.7 ± 12.8 years).
Interventions
Patients were classified into three groups according to rehabilitation therapy they received: a conventional group (only weekdays PT and OT; n = 70), an additional PT group (additional PT on weekends; n = 119), and an additional PT + OT group (additional PT and OT on weekends; n = 112).
Main Outcome Measure
Functional Independence Measure (FIM) effectiveness was calculated as (discharge FIM - admission FIM/maximum FIM − admission FIM) × 100. A multivariate general linear model was used to assess the difference in FIM effectiveness among the groups.
Results
The mean FIM effectiveness in the conventional, additional PT, and additional PT + OT groups were 39.3 ± 30.1, 43.4 ± 33.2, and 54.3 ± 29.1, respectively. The multivariate analysis revealed a significant difference in FIM effectiveness among the three groups (P = 0.036), and the ηp2 was 0.02, indicating a small effect. The additional PT + OT group showed significantly greater improvements in FIM effectiveness than the conventional group (mean difference = 8.78, SE = 3.58, 95% confidence interval: 0.17-17.39).
Conclusions
This study showed that the additional PT + OT group had better functional recovery than did the conventional group. This indicates that increasing the amount of both PT and OT can promote post-stroke functional recovery.
This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
No comments:
Post a Comment