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.

Showing posts with label 31 hyperacute possibilities. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 31 hyperacute possibilities. Show all posts

Friday, November 18, 2022

Neuropharmacological Actions of Metformin in Stroke

With this and all this earlier metformin research, is it being used in your hospital?

If not, you don't have functioning stroke doctors or hospital.

Earlier research has this line:The drug, which is cheaply available for just $0.16 a day, works by boosting the number of oxygen molecules released into a cell, which in turn seems to benefit the robustness and longevity of the body’s basic building blocks. (This would seem to be much easier and faster than HBOT. I'm requesting this at my next stroke, my doctor won't know what hit her when I tell her how to treat me.)

My list of 31 things I was going to demand after my next stroke. I guess metformin isn't in there.

 

 

Neuropharmacological Actions of Metformin in Stroke

Buy Article:

$68.00 + tax (Refund Policy)

Increasing epidemiologic evidence suggests that metformin, a well-established AMPK activator and the most favorable first-line anti-diabetic drug, reduces stroke incidence and severity. However, the mechanism for this remains unclear. Moreover, previous experimental studies have reported controversial results about the effects of metformin on stroke outcomes during the acute phase. However, recent studies have consistently suggested that AMPK-mediated microglia/macrophage polarization and angioneurogenesis may play essential roles in metformin-promoted, long-term functional recovery following stroke. The present review summarizes the neuropharmacological actions of metformin in experimental stroke with an emphasis on the recent findings that the cell-specific effects and duration of AMPK activation are critical to the effects of metformin on stroke outcomes.

Keywords: AMPK activation; anti-diabetic drug; metformin; neuropharmacological actions

Document Type: Research Article

Publication date: May 1, 2015

Monday, January 24, 2022

What should your doctor be doing the first week you are in the hospital?

What is your doctor's plan? The only plan is for 100% recovery, don't let your doctor talk of anything less.     SPECIFICALLY!  If your doctor hems and haws and uses the craptastic saying: 'All strokes are different, all stroke recoveries are different'. It means your doctor knows ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ON HOW TO GET YOU RECOVERED! But since  I'm not medically trained  you can't listen to anything I say. 

My doctor wrote 3 prescriptions for E.T.(Evaluate and Treat) to PT, ST, OT, and did nothing the first week allowing 5.4 billion neurons to die.   Meaning he knew ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ABOUT STROKE RECOVERY.

 

Your doctor should have very specific treatment plans for every one of these problems.  If your doctor doesn't know of all these and have treatment plans then you don't have a useful doctor, trade for something better.

 Your doctors and hospital  have known for decades that stroke recovery doesn't work.  Only 10% of patients get to full recovery.

Do you prefer your doctor and hospital incompetence NOT KNOWING? OR NOT DOING?

 Every single one of the following sections needs a SPECIFIC PROTOCOL FROM YOUR DOCTOR if they are competent at all.

First, create an objective diagnosis of exactly what area of the brain is dead or dying and map that to the deficits presented.


Start all the protocols necessary to stop the 5 causes of the neuronal cascade of death in the first days. I lost 5.4 billion neurons because my doctor did nothing that first week.  If I had only lost 177 million neurons in the 90 minutes it took me to get tPA I would have easily recovered by now.


 tPA only fully works to reverse the stroke 12% of the time. Known since 1996. What is your doctor doing to ensure that you still get to full recovery if tPA doesn't fully work?  Your doctor has had 26 years to work out a solution.  WHERE IS IT?

 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

30% of survivors having sleep problems.

What is your doctor's sleep protocol? Do sleeping pills even create good sleep?

 

 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Stop brain atrophy due to lack of sleep and all other causes.  What is your doctor's brain atrophy prevention protocol?


Lack of sleep may shrink your brain September, 2014:

 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

You do have a 23% chance of stroke survivors getting PTSD.

What is your doctor's protocol to prevent that? And if not prevented what is the protocol to treat it?

 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Only 10% of patients get to full recovery. How is your doctor ensuring you are one of them?

 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Your risks of dementia, has your doctor told you of this?

1. A documented 33% dementia chance post-stroke from an Australian study?   May 2012.

2. Then this study came out and seems to have a range from 17-66%. December 2013.`    

3. A 20% chance in this research.   July 2013.

4. Dementia Risk Doubled in Patients Following Stroke September 2018

Where are the  protocols to prevent your dementia?

 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 How is your stroke doctor preventing your 39% chance of post stroke delirium?

 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The researchers found that 21% of patients had developed cachexia one year later.

Weakness and wasting of the body due to severe chronic illness.

What is your doctors prevention protocol on this? 

 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Post stroke anxiety(20% chance).  

What are your doctor's protocols to prevent that?

 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Post stroke depression(33% chance).

What are your doctor's protocols to prevent that? The correct solution is to have EXACT STROKE PROTOCOLS LEADING TO 100% RECOVERY. Your survivor will be too busy counting reps and looking forward to recovery to get depressed. Treatment after already depressed is totally the wrong solution. PREVENT IT FROM OCCURRING!

 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We've known for years that seizures can occur post stroke. What is your doctor doing to prevent them?

 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 What is your doctor doing to ensure you aren't having 69% sedentary time while in the hospital?  If you aren't doing direct therapy with therapists you should have thousands of hours of action observation videos.

 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The occurrence of shoulder pain after stroke is quite common in hemiplegia with an estimated incidence between 16% and 84%. 

What is your doctors EXACT PROTOCOL to prevent such shoulder pain. PREVENT, not treat after the fact. 

 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

YOUR DOCTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY IS TO GET EXACT DIET PROTOCOLS CREATED. No protocols s/he needs to be fired. I take no prisoners in trying to get stroke solved by those who are responsible for solving it. In fact I would have the board of directors fired for incompetency also.

 

Diet: Your doctor is responsible for having the dietician create diets for ALL THESE:

For stroke prevention; for stroke recovery; for dementia prevention; for cognitive improvement; for cholesterol reduction; for plaque removal; for Parkinsons prevention; for inflammation reduction; for blood pressure reduction; for dementia prevention; for Alzheimer's prevention.

In case your doctor does nothing you can start guessing by reading all these:


The role of diet in secondary stroke prevention

 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

20-25% apathy post stroke

 This is a secondary problem which is solved by having

EXACT STROKE PROTOCOLS LEADING TO 100% RECOVERY. Your survivor will be too busy counting reps and looking forward to recovery to be apathetic.

 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What is your doctor's solution? You can't do marijuana until your doctor prescribes it.

Image result for why doctors won't prescribe marijuana

Marijuana use linked with decreased constipation

 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The results of the tests revealed that over 50% of the stroke patients had attention disorders that had not been diagnosed.  

Has your doctor diagnosed this and created a treatment plan for it?

 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 These are your likely cognitive problems. Your doctor has a lot of work to do to prevent them.

5 lost years of brain cognition due to your stroke?

post-stroke cognitive impairment (PCI), the prevalence of which is high (from 24 to 70%)

 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fatigue is estimated all over the place. Fatigue and spasticity were my two worst problems to overcome. I bulled my way thru fatigue with tons of coffee. Spasticity hasn't lessened one bit in the past 15 years.  

At least half of all stroke survivors experience fatigue 

Or is it 70%?

Or is it 40%?

 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Spasticity; the main reason I haven't recovered. No one in the world seems to know one damn specific thing about curing it, all we get are useless management strategies like botox or muscle relaxants..

Definition here: Spasticity is a condition in which there is an abnormal increase in muscle tone or stiffness of muscle, which might  interfere with movement, speech, or be associated with discomfort or pain. 

You might hear it called tone, which sounds so benign,it's not. 

Since 30% of survivors have spasticity you would think your doctor would have created a solution or at least initiated research into a solution. But I bet your doctor has done nothing in all the years of practice and survivors not getting cured of spasticity. Ask them what they are doing to CURE spasticity.

 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


And why doesn't your doctor have something like this for every stroke patient? Maybe call it a stroke protocol?

My doctor did absolutely nothing that first week letting 5.4 billion neurons die.

Of course your doctor will not listen to anything I have to say. Ask why the research I point to is invalid.

 

Tuesday, June 30, 2020

Association of pre-stroke metformin use, stroke severity, and thrombolysis outcome

So that brings up an immediate question. 'Should metformin be immediately given to stroke patients as part of their hyperacute therapy?'  WHOM will answer that question? Specific names needed. You can see the fucking incompetence of all the stroke medical world in that nothing seems to have been done with this in the past 4.5 years.

You could stay forever young (or young for a long time) with this diabetes drug 

Dec. 2015

In this one is this line:The drug, which is cheaply available for just $0.16 a day, works by boosting the number of oxygen molecules released into a cell, which in turn seems to benefit the robustness and longevity of the body’s basic building blocks. (This would seem to be much easier and faster than HBOT. I'm requesting this at my next stroke, my doctor won't know what hit her when I tell her how to treat me.)

My list of 31 things I was going to demand after my next stroke. I guess metformin isn't in there.

 The latest here:

Association of pre-stroke metformin use, stroke severity, and thrombolysis outcome

Laura P Westphal, Roni Widmer, Ulrike Held, Klaus Steigmiller, Christian Hametner, Peter Ringleb, Sami Curtze, Nicolas Martinez-Majander, Marjaana Tiainen, Christian H Nolte, Jan F Scheitz, Hebun Erdur, Alexandros A Polymeris, Christopher Traenka, Ashraf Eskandari, Patrik Michel, Mirjam R Heldner, Marcel Arnold, Andrea Zini, Laura Vandelli, Jonathan M Coutinho, Adrien E Groot, Visnja Padjen, Dejana R Jovanovic, Yannick Bejot, Céline Brenière, Guillaume Turc, Pierre Seners, Alessandro Pezzini, Mauro Magoni, Didier Leys, Sixtine Gilliot, Michael J Scherrer, Georg Kägi, Andreas R Luft, Henrik Gensicke, Paul Nederkoorn, Turgut Tatlisumak, Stefan T Engelter, Susanne Wegener

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate whether pretreatment with metformin (MET) is associated with less stroke severity and better outcome after intravenous thrombolysis (IVT), we analyzed a cohort of 1919 stroke patients with type-2 diabetes in a multicenter exploratory analysis.
Methods: Data from patients with diabetes affected by ischemic stroke treated with IVT were collected within the European Thrombolysis in Ischemic Stroke Patients (TRISP) collaboration. We applied propensity score matching (PSM) to obtain balanced baseline characteristics of patients treated with and without MET.
Results: Of 1919 stroke patients with type-2 diabetes who underwent IVT, 757 (39%) had received MET before stroke (MET+), whereas 1162 (61%) had not (MET-). MET+ patients were younger with a male preponderance. Hypercholesterolemia and pretreatment with statins, antiplatelets or antihypertensives were more common in the MET+ group. After PSM, the two groups were well balanced with respect to demographic and clinical aspects. Stroke severity on admission (NIHSS 10.0 ± 6.7 vs. 11.3 ± 6.5), 3-months degree of independence on modified Rankin Scale (mRS): 2 [IQR 1.0, 4.0] vs. 3 [IQR 1.0, 4.0] as well as mortality (12.5% vs. 18%) were significantly lower in the MET+ group. The frequency of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhages did not differ between groups. HbA1c levels were well balanced between both groups.
Conclusions: Stroke patients with diabetes on treatment with MET receiving IVT had less severe strokes on admission and a better functional outcome at 3 months. This suggests a protective effect of MET resulting in less severe strokes as well as beneficial thrombolysis outcome.
  • Received April 19, 2019.
  • Accepted in final form January 6, 2020.

Tuesday, June 2, 2020

Biomedical Engineering professor and team develop treatment for traumatic brain injury

With ANY BRAINS AT ALL,  our stroke leadership would fire up research on this for stroke. But that will never occur, two problems;

1. We have NO STROKE LEADERSHIP.

2. There are no brains in stroke.  

The minocycline approach was researched/published in October 2009  SO 11 TEARS OF  EPIC FAILURE EVERYWHERE IN STROKE! Proving once again that the existing stroke associations are worthless.  

I put this in my list of 31 things I was going to demand after my next stroke.

The latest here:

Biomedical Engineering professor and team develop treatment for traumatic brain injury

Dr. Teresa Murray, associate professor in Biomedical Engineering and the Center for Biomedical Engineering and Rehabilitation Sciences at Louisiana Tech University, is collaborating with former Louisiana Tech doctoral student Dr. Chelsea Pernici and professors at the University of Arizona to help develop solutions to traumatic brain injury.
Murray and Pernici are working with Dr. Jonathan Lifshitz and Dr. Rachel Rowe, director and research assistant professor, respectively, with the Translational Neurotrauma Research Program at the University of Arizona College of Medicine – Phoenix, to develop a treatment that could prevent memory and emotional problems in patients suffering from axonal injury caused by traumatic brain injuries (TBIs).
The study was led by Murray and Pernici who used a new imaging technology to show how diseases and injuries affect the brain over time and how medicines could reduce brain damage. This novel imaging was created in Murray’s lab. Through this technology, the group of researchers were able to repeatedly image the same axons in the brain before and after brain injury, providing proof of TBI-related axonal pathology.
Using a novel combination of high-resolution imaging and a GRIN lens implanted in the brain of mice, the team documented axonal injury and the recovery process after a blunt injury to the brain. GRIN lenses are microscopic glass lenses that allow scientists to focus closely on the cells for good image quality. These lenses are smaller than Lincoln’s nose on a U.S. penny and were adopted by a handful of biologists to better study the brain.
Murray developed an improved GRIN lens system to see more details of brain cells. Her team also designed 3D-printed hardware to help them find the exact same cells for each imaging session. Her improved GRIN lenses allowed the team to find and evaluate the same injured axons over several weeks post injury.
“The fine communication elements of neurons — axons — are torn, ruptured and damaged, which contributes to a multitude of clinical symptoms,” Lifshitz said. “To date, these processes have been inferred from fixed histological sections, clinical imaging and cells in culture. No one has observed an axon prior to injury, the consequence of injury and the outcome. Here, we show that axons do sustain injury and can either recover or become truncated.”
Tracking the time in which axons become affected, the team employed a clinically approved drug, minocycline, to reduce inflammation, which slowed axon injury, recovered them from injury and preserved function. The team tested the drug’s effectiveness for immediate use within 45 minutes of the incident, compared to delayed use at three days post injury – both time points showed positive effects. The minocycline drug treatment promoted the recovery of injured axons. With treatment, a much larger percentage of the damaged axons healed, compared to those without treatment.
“Most brain injuries cause damage to just a few axons,” Murray said. “These few axons can’t be seen on MRIs and CT scans. So, most TBI patients are sent home with the hope that they will get better over time. However, even a few damaged axons can disrupt communication in the brain and affect neurological function.”
“The novel fluorescence imaging method using GRIN lenses allows researchers to study brain cells in both time and space, offering a unique opportunity to better understand the effect of drugs on brain structure over time,” Pernici added. “It’s exciting to see that although axons become damaged after TBI, the injury can resolve and with this method, we have the opportunity to better understand that timescale.”
The team plans to continue their research by pairing minocycline with another drug to further reduce this early damage. If successful, this treatment could lessen the chances of memory loss and emotional problems for people suffering a TBI.
“This study provides hope that we can use minocycline effectively if the drug can be taken early in the process and not given long-term. This could help reduce the inflammation, and thus some of the permanent damage caused by brain injury,” Murray said.
No drug currently on the market is clinically used to prevent axon injury. The results of their research were published in Scientific Reports on May 8.

Wednesday, November 13, 2019

59 Interventions to Improve Recovery after Stroke by Dr. Steven Cramer

From Dr. Steven Cramer so I know this should be good. 

 

My 31 ideas on hyperacute therapy I'm going to insist my doctor give me during the first week, even without further research or real clinical trials.

Or these 177 hyperacute therapies that need more research.    

Don't follow me, I'm not medically trained.

 

59 Interventions to Improve Recovery after Stroke by Dr. Steven Cramer


TLDR(Too long, didn't read). It is your doctor's responsibility to know about all of these, mine vs. Dr. Cramers.

Protocol is used 4 times in this paper so maybe there is something useful in there. 

The interventions are not numbered so good luck trying to identify them.  

Saturday, May 25, 2019

Research: Nerve stimulation lessens disability in stroke patients Therapy used on patients within 24 hours of stroke

Even if not significant, this is what I would call throwing the kitchen sink at the stroke since it is safe. Every little bit helps, ask your patients if they want this.  I would demand that my doctor do this for me along with these.

My 31 ideas on hyperacute therapy I'm going to insist my doctor give me during the first week, even without further research or real clinical trials.

Don't follow me, I'm not medically trained.

  

Research: Nerve stimulation lessens disability in stroke patients - Therapy used on patients within 24 hours of stroke

(CNN) - There may be new hope for stroke patients: An experimental nerve stimulation therapy helped reduce disability, new research finds.
The therapy, known as active nerve cell cluster stimulation, was used on patients within 24 hours of an ischemic stroke. This most common type of "brain attack" is often caused by a clot that blocks a blood vessel and so prevents blood flow in the brain. Within minutes of such a blockage, brain cells begin to die, leading to potential mental and physical disabilities.
The study, published Friday in the medical journal The Lancet, was funded by BrainsGate Ltd., the manufacturer of the stimulation device.
The treatment consists of a small electrode that actively stimulates a cluster of nerve cells behind the nose. (This temporary neurostimulator, which is implanted through the roof of the mouth, requires only local anesthesia.)
Stroke is the fifth leading cause of death in the United States, where nearly 800,000 people experience a new or recurrent stroke each year, according to the National Stroke Association. Worldwide, stroke claims 6.2 million lives each year -- more than AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria put together, the World Stroke Organization says.

A safe alternative?


There are just two US Food and Drug Administration-approved treatments for ischemic stroke: a clot-dissolving drug and a device that threads through arteries to capture and remove blockages. The drug does not work for all patients and becomes less effective as minutes pass after a stroke, while the device requires an expertise that is usually found only in major medical centers.
Research has shown that nerve stimulation can dilate undamaged arteries, increasing blood flow in the brain. Neurostimulation also preserves the blood-brain barrier, which prevents brain swelling, while improving the ability of brain cells to form new connections.
The new study included more than 1,000 people who had experienced an acute ischemic stroke and were randomly assigned to receive either the experimental therapy or a placebo therapy. Half of the 536 people who had the real nerve stimulation had favorable outcomes -- defined as better-than-expected disability levels three months after their strokes -- versus 40% of the 519 people who received the fake stimulation.
These results are not considered "significant" by statistical standards, but when findings from earlier studies are combined with the new data, they suggest that the therapy can be effective for ischemic stroke patients if used within 24 hours.
No differences in deaths or side effects were seen between the two groups of patients. The proportion of patients with a positive outcome increased from 40% to 70% when neurostimulation was applied at low- to midrange intensity, yet it fell back to 40% when high intensity was used, the researchers noted.
The experimental neurostimulation treatment could be a safe and effective alternative to medication for some stroke patients, the researchers concluded. Future studies will look at how effective the treatment is when paired with clot-dissolving medications and clot-retrieving devices.

The future of stroke therapy


Seth Hays, a neuroscientist and assistant professor in the Department of Bioengineering at the University of Texas at Dallas, said the study was "well-designed" and "very large."
"Stimulation with the device didn't raise any safety concerns, which is a clear strength," said Hays, who was not involved in the study but has done his own research in this area.
One major caveat was that the researchers could not statistically prove that receiving the therapy worked better than not receiving it, even if they used additional data from previous research to show benefits, Hays said. "This tempers my enthusiasm."
New treatments are definitely needed for stroke patients, Hays said: "Although remarkable advances have been made in acute stroke treatment, stroke is still a leading cause of disability." Additionally, some patients are ineligible for existing treatments, but neurostimulation may be used with a large population, he said.
"Nerves are highly responsive to electrical stimulation, and capitalizing on this with clever techniques represents a largely untapped potential strategy to treat stroke and other neurological disorders," Hays said. Continued improvements in the devices and their implementation is likely to "really impact treatment of neurological disorders in the near term," he said: "I think devices are the future for the treatment of neurological disorders."

Saturday, April 20, 2019

Victoria stem cell trial to aid stroke patients

I see nothing here that signals success for stem cells. It is being delivered during the course of spontaneous recovery. Why attribute gains to stem cells rather than the normal recovery? They show nothing about measuring surviving stem cells.  There are many other things that can be done in the first 24 hours. Your doctor will know none of them. Don't follow me, not medically trained.

My 31 ideas on hyperacute therapy I'm going to insist my doctor give me during the first week, even without further research or real clinical trials.

 

Victoria stem cell trial to aid stroke patients

A world-first trial is underway in Victoria to use stem cell infusions to possibly reduce a stroke patient's brain injury and improve their recovery.
When Kevin Baird was rushed to a Melbourne hospital after having a stroke, he didn't expect to become the public face of a future world-first treatment.
The 67-year-old took part in a trial using stem cell infusions as a possible therapy to reduce his brain injury and improve his recovery after being admitted to Monash Medical Centre in February.
"Before the treatment they asked me if I could raise my hands ... when I actually tried to, I couldn't. I was only speaking in a mumble as well," Mr Baird said.
Within 24 hours of suffering a stroke, he was intravenously given amniotic stem cells from a donated placenta.
About a day after that first phase of treatment, Mr Baird noticed an improvement and now suffers only a mild facial droop with no further damage to his brain tissue.
"I've come on in leaps and bounds since then. I believe it helped tremendously," he said of the trial treatment.
It's this success story that researchers from Monash Health, La Trobe University and the Hudson Institute of Medical Research hope will be replicated in other patients.
"After a stroke the key is working to save neurons before they die. 'Time is brain' is the catchcry, so by rapidly treating a stroke and saving brain tissue, we reduce lasting damage which can cause disability," La Trobe University professor Chris Sobey said.
"It is a long process, but we are hopeful that this collaboration can contribute to the next great breakthrough in global stroke care, and prevent ongoing disability for patients."
While there are other treatments for stroke such as clot-busting medications, these are still not enough for all patients.
"A significant number of patients may not have access to these therapies or they're not possible," Monash Health associate professor Henry Ma said.
"Stroke is the second-leading cause of death globally, and leaves a huge number of people with significant disability."
The cells carry no risk of rejection as they don't need to be matched to individual patients.
More people are needed for the safety trial before a second phase proceeds.
Source AAP

Thursday, January 31, 2019

For stroke survivors in recovery, physical activity can spell the difference between dependence and independence - ASA statement

As a general statement this is fine but is directed to the wrong side of the equation. Your doctor is responsible to get you recovered enough to be able to do this. This blame the patient shit needs to stop.

THIS IS YOUR DOCTORS' RESPONSIBILITY!

 Did your doctor DO ANYTHING AT ALL in the first week? Or was incompetence in action there? S/he just let all those neurons in the penumbra die during the neuronal cascade of death in the first week? I don't care that nothing is proven yet about how to stop that death cascade. What researchers is your doctor working with to find answers? No contact with researchers, call the president and ask  how far up the chain does firing need to go? Doctor? Stroke department head? President itself? Board of Directors? I'm serious here, a lot of dead wood needs to be removed in stroke starting with doctors.

My 31 ideas on hyperacute therapy I'm going to insist my doctor give me during the first week,
even without further research or real clinical trials.

 


Tuesday, January 8, 2019

Very early versus delayed mobilisation after stroke

Well fuck, still no protocols on this and obviously still doing nothing on first day interventions.  My 31 ideas on hyperacute therapy I'm going to insist my doctor give me during the first week,
even without further research or real clinical trials. I will take the chance that more benefits accrue than danger by using these. But run them by your doctor. No knowledge of any of them and you need to fire that doctor immediately, practicing medicine with no knowledge.  Does no one in stroke read/implement any research suggesting interventions in the first day?  Or is everyone in stroke so fucking lazy that they are waiting for SOMEONE ELSE TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM?

Like your 10 million yearly stroke survivors? Have your patients solve their own problems?

Very early versus delayed mobilisation after stroke


Abstract

available in

Background

Very early mobilisation (VEM) is performed in some stroke units and recommended in some acute stroke clinical guidelines. However, it is unclear whether very early mobilisation independently improves outcome after stroke.

Objectives

To determine whether very early mobilisation (started as soon as possible, and no later than 48 hours after onset of symptoms) in people with acute stroke improves recovery (primarily the proportion of independent survivors) compared with usual care.

Search methods

We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched 31 July 2017). We also systematically searched 19 electronic databases including; CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 7 in the Cochrane Library (searched July 2017), MEDLINE Ovid (1950 to August 2017), Embase Ovid (1980 to August 2017), CINAHL EBSCO (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature; 1937 to August 2017) , PsycINFO Ovid (1806 to August 2017), AMED Ovid (Allied and Complementary Medicine Database), SPORTDiscus EBSCO (1830 to August 2017). We searched relevant ongoing trials and research registers (searched December 2016), the Chinese medical database, Wanfangdata (searched to November 2016), and reference lists, and contacted researchers in the field.

Selection criteria

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of people with acute stroke, comparing an intervention group that started out‐of‐bed mobilisation within 48 hours of stroke, and aimed to reduce time‐to‐first mobilisation, with or without an increase in the amount or frequency (or both) of mobilisation activities, with usual care, where time‐to‐first mobilisation was commenced later.

Data collection and analysis

Two review authors independently selected trials, extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and applied the GRADE approach to assess the quality of the evidence. The primary outcome was death or poor outcome (dependency or institutionalisation) at the end of scheduled follow‐up. Secondary outcomes included death, dependency, institutionalisation, activities of daily living (ADL), extended ADL, quality of life, walking ability, complications (e.g. deep vein thrombosis), patient mood, and length of hospital stay. We also analysed outcomes at three‐month follow‐up.

Main results

We included nine RCTs with 2958 participants; one trial provided most of the information (2104 participants). The median (range) delay to starting mobilisation after stroke onset was 18.5 (13.1 to 43) hours in the VEM group and 33.3 (22.5 to 71.5) hours in the usual care group. The median difference within trials was 12.7 (4 to 45.6) hours. Other differences in intervention varied between trials; in five trials, the VEM group were also reported to have received more time in therapy, or more mobilisation activity.
Primary outcome data were available for 2542 of 2618 (97.1%) participants randomized and followed up for a median of three months. VEM probably led to similar or slightly more deaths and participants who had a poor outcome, compared with delayed mobilisation (51% versus 49%; odds ratio (OR) 1.08, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.92 to 1.26; P = 0.36; 8 trials; moderate‐quality evidence). Death occurred in 7% of participants who received delayed mobilisation, and 8.5% of participants who received VEM (OR 1.27, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.70; P = 0.11; 8 trials, 2570 participants; moderate‐quality evidence), and the effects on experiencing any complication were unclear (OR 0.88; 95% CI 0.73 to 1.06; P = 0.18; 7 trials, 2778 participants; low‐quality evidence). Analysis using outcomes collected only at three‐month follow‐up did not alter the conclusions.
The mean ADL score (measured at end of follow‐up, with the 20‐point Barthel Index) was higher in those who received VEM compared with the usual care group (mean difference (MD) 1.94, 95% CI 0.75 to 3.13, P = 0.001; 8 trials, 9 comparisons, 2630/2904 participants (90.6%); low‐quality evidence), but there was substantial heterogeneity (93%). Effect sizes were smaller for outcomes collected at three‐month follow‐up, rather than later.
The mean length of stay was shorter in those who received VEM compared with the usual care group (MD ‐1.44, 95% CI ‐2.28 to ‐0.60, P = 0.0008; 8 trials, 2532/2618 participants (96.7%); low‐quality evidence). Confidence in the answer was limited by the variable definitions of length of stay. The other secondary outcome analyses (institutionalisation, extended activities of daily living, quality of life, walking ability, patient mood) were limited by lack of data.
Sensitivity analyses by trial quality: none of the outcome conclusions were altered if we restricted analyses to trials with the lowest risk of bias (based on method of randomization, allocation concealment, completeness of follow‐up, and blinding of final assessment), or information about the amount of mobilisation.
Sensitivity analysis by intervention characteristics: analyses restricted to trials where the mean VEM time‐to‐first mobilisation was less than 24 hours, showed an odds of death of 1.35 (95% CI 0.99 to 1.83; P = 0.06; I² = 25%; 5 trials). Analyses restricted to the trials that clearly reported a more prolonged out‐of‐bed activity showed a similar primary outcome (OR 1.14; 0.96 to 1.35; P = 0.13; I² = 28%; 5 trials), and odds of death (OR 1.27; 0.93 to 1.73; P = 0.13; I² = 0%; 4 trials) to the main analysis.
Exploratory network meta‐analysis (NMA): we were unable to analyze by the amount of therapy, but low‐quality evidence indicated that time‐to‐first mobilisation at around 24 hours was associated with the lowest odds of death or poor outcome, compared with earlier or later mobilisation.

Authors' conclusions

VEM, which usually involved first mobilisation within 24 hours of stroke onset, did not increase the number of people who survived or made a good recovery after their stroke. VEM may have reduced the length of stay in hospital by about one day, but this was based on low‐quality evidence. Based on the potential hazards reported in the single largest RCT, the sensitivity analysis of trials commencing mobilisation within 24 hours, and the NMA, there was concern that VEM commencing within 24 hours may carry an increased risk, at least in some people with stroke. Given the uncertainty around these effect estimates, more detailed research is still required.(Well, write up a protocol for what is currently known. Waiting for perfection allows massive numbers of neurons to continue dying every day.)