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.

Thursday, July 20, 2023

Influence of motivation on rehabilitation outcomes after subacute stroke in convalescent rehabilitation wards

You have motivation wrong. Write up 100% recovery protocols on this and survivors will do the millions of reps needed, no external motivation required. You don't understand one goddamn thing about stroke survivors, DO YOU? The problem is stroke researchers are not motivated to solve stroke. What the fuck is your solution to that failure? We still don't know how to motivate stroke medical 'professionals' to solve stroke to 100% recovery!

 

Influence of motivation on rehabilitation outcomes after subacute stroke in convalescent rehabilitation wards

Taiki Yoshida1,2, Yohei Otaka1,3*, Shin Kitamura1,2, Kazuki Ushizawa1,3, Masashi Kumagai1, Jun Yaeda4 and Rieko Osu5
  • 1Tokyo Bay Rehabilitation Hospital, Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Chiba, Japan
  • 2Faculty of Rehabilitation, School of Health Sciences, Fujita Health University, Aichi, Japan
  • 3Department of Rehabilitation Medicine I, Fujita Health University School of Medicine, Aichi, Japan
  • 4Graduate School of Comprehensive Human Science, University of Tsukuba, Tokyo, Japan
  • 5Faculty of Human Sciences, Waseda University, Saitama, Japan

Background: The motivation for rehabilitation is important in encouraging stroke patients to participate in rehabilitation; however, its relationship with outcomes is not well known. In addition, changes in patient motivation during hospitalization have not been examined.

Aim: To examine the relationship between motivation and rehabilitation outcomes for subacute stroke patients and to investigate the changes in motivation.

Design: Prospective cohort study.

Setting: Subacute rehabilitation hospital.

Population: The study enrolled a consecutive sample of patients (n = 201) with stroke admitted to a subacute rehabilitation ward from October 2017 to March 2019.

Methods: The functional independence measure and motivation in stroke patients for rehabilitation scale was evaluated at admission; at one, two, and three months after admission; and at discharge. The effectiveness and efficiency of the functional independence measure were calculated as rehabilitation outcomes. The effect of motivation on outcomes and the change in motivation in stroke patients for rehabilitation scale scores over time were analyzed using a linear mixed model.

Results: The median (interquartile range) converted motivation in stroke patients for rehabilitation scale scores (converted to a range of 0–100) at admission; one, two, and three months after admission; and discharge was 86 (76–95), 83 (77–94), 81 (74–95), 81 (71–93), and 84 (75–95), respectively. The median (interquartile range) of effectiveness and efficiency of the functional independence measure from admission to discharge was 0.82 (0.68–0.91) and 0.41 (0.30–0.59), respectively. Motivation in stroke patients for rehabilitation scale scores were not significantly associated with the effectiveness and efficiency of the functional independence measure (p > 0.05). Motivation in stroke patients for rehabilitation scale scores were significantly lower at two (β = −3.1, 95% confidence interval [−5.3, −0.9], p = 0.005) and three (β = −4.4, 95% confidence interval [−7.3, −1.6], p = 0.002) months after admission than at admission.

Conclusion: Motivation might not directly affect rehabilitation outcomes assessed by the functional independence measure. Furthermore, many participants remained highly motivated, although their motivation decreased at one or three months after admission.

Clinical rehabilitation impact: Assumptions that rehabilitation is ineffective because of low motivation may not be correct. To examine the influence on outcomes, both motivation and daily activities should be considered.

No comments:

Post a Comment