Predicting longitudinal progression in functional mobility after stroke: A prospective cohort study

Whatever the fuck longitudinal progression is? Anyway, useless, just more prediction crapola.  Damn, we need survivors in charge so we don't waste resources on prediction and biomarker crapola like this. 

Predicting longitudinal progression in functional mobility after stroke: A prospective cohort study

Buvarp D, et al

Stroke|June 25, 2020

The present study was undertaken to ascertain longitudinal changes in functional mobility after stroke. Researchers evaluated functional mobility applying the Timed Up-and-Go test on 5 different occasions: 5 days after onset(I think at 5 days I got my AFO), within 24 hours after discharge, 1 month after discharge, 3 months, and 1 year post stroke. They stratified stroke severity based on impairments and activity limitations using a baseline cluster analysis. Developing a multilevel model, longitudinal progression in functional mobility based on stroke severity was prognosticated. This study enrolled a total of 135 patients at baseline. It was indicated that the recovery of functional mobility differs between mild and moderate stroke. During the first 3 months, individuals with moderate stroke improved their functional mobility, after which it decreased significantly. These data imply that long-term rehabilitation is desirable to maintain and perhaps elevate the gained functional mobility. This study highlight that older individuals and those with moderate impairments and activity limitations have particular needs. Read the full article on Stroke.

Longitudinal randomised controlled trials in rehabilitation post-stroke: a systematic review on the quality of reporting and use of baseline outcome values

I'm sure that our fucking failures of stroke associations have not analyzed any longitudinal data and compared anything between studies. FAILURES ONCE AGAIN. 

Longitudinal randomised controlled trials in rehabilitation post-stroke: a systematic review on the quality of reporting and use of baseline outcome values

The World Health Organisation stresses the need to collect high quality longitudinal data on rehabilitation and to improve the comparability between studies. This implies using all the information available and transparent reporting.

We therefore investigated the quality of reported or planned randomised controlled trials on rehabilitation post-stroke with a repeated measure of physical functioning, provided recommendations on the presentation of results using regression parameters, and focused on the difficulties of adjustment for baseline outcome measures.

Methods: We performed a systematic review of the literature from 2011 to 2013 and collected information on the way data was analysed. Moreover we described various approaches to analyse the data using mixed models illustrated with real data.

Results: Eighty-four eligible studies were identified of which 61 % (51/84) failed to analyse the data longitudinally.

Moreover, for 30 % (25/83) the method for adjustment for baseline is not known or not existent. Using real data we were able to show how much difference in results an adjustment for baseline data can make.

We showed how to provide interpretable intervention effects using regression coefficients while making use of all the information available in the data.

Conclusions: Our review showed that improvements were needed in the analysis of longitudinal trials in rehabilitation post-stroke in order to maximise the use of collected data and improve comparability between studies. Reporting fully the method used (including baseline adjustment) and using methods like mixed models could easily achieve this.

Author: Odile SauzetMaren KleineAnke Menzel-BegemannAnne-Kathrin Exner
Credits/Source: BMC Neurology 2015, 15:99

Long-term outcome poststroke: Predictors of activity limitation and participation restriction

Every country should have this kind of followup. It seems to be the only way to get stroke rehabilitation needs in front of the public.
http://www.naric.com/research/rehab/record.cfm?search=2&type=all&criteria=J62305&phrase=no&rec=117021
NARIC Accession Number: J62305. What's this?
ISSN: 0003-9993.
Author(s): Gadidi, Vered; Katz-Leurer, Michal; Carmeli, Eli; Bornstein, Natan M..
Publication Year: 2011.
Number of Pages: 7.
Abstract: Study examined long-term activity limitation, participation restriction, and patients’ overall perception of recovery among stroke patients 4 years poststroke, and evaluated the association between these factors. In addition, the study investigated those factors present at the time of stroke onset that could predict the level of activity limitation and participation restriction at 4 years poststroke. All 139 first ever stroke patients admitted to the Sheba Medical Center in Israel between February and March 2004 were followed and reassessed for activity limitation and participation restrictions using the Barthel index and the Frenchay Activities Index, respectively. Perception of recovery was assessed by 2 simple questions. At 4 years poststroke, 9 patients (6.4 percent) were lost to follow-up, 71 (54.1 percent) patients had survived; 42.3 percent with activity limitation, 28.2 percent were classified as restricted in participation, and 78.1 percent felt they had not completely recovered. The most significant predictors of activity limitation at 4 years poststroke were age at stroke onset and disability in the acute phase. None of the demographic characteristics or baseline clinical features predicted participation restriction. A positive association was noted between activity limitation and participation restriction 4 years poststroke.
Descriptor Terms: DAILY LIVING, FUNCTIONAL LIMITATIONS, INTERNATIONAL REHABILITATION, LONGITUDINAL STUDIES, OUTCOMES, PREDICTION, STROKE.