METHODS: Drawing on ethnographic research from rural Malaysia, this descriptive article explores ethnic Malaysian-Chinese stroke survivors' lay understandings of stroke. Eighteen community-dwelling stroke survivors aged 50-83 took part in the study.
RESULTS: Causation of stroke was derived from cultural, biomedical and social sources. Participants also drew simultaneously from both biomedical and traditional explanations of stroke to develop their own understanding of etiology. Similarities with biomedical causation and other studies from different cultures were found. Participants' typically focused on the more immediate effects of stroke and often do not attribute causation and association with their comorbid conditions which are also risk factors of stroke.
CONCLUSION: Lack of knowledge about stroke and its symptoms was evident in participants' account. Findings emphasize the importance of knowledge based health interventions, especially in health education strategies for stroke survivors to reduce delays to diagnosis and potentially improve health outcomes post-stroke. Implications for rehabilitation Stroke survivors often form explanatory models of stroke that draw from both biomedical and traditional explanations of stroke. Understanding how people derive lay understandings of stroke can contribute towards developing the goals and activities that facilitate recovery and rehabilitation in similar settings. Health practitioners in the community should strengthen communication regarding the identification, etiology and risk factors of stroke with stroke survivors and their carers to improve compliance to medication, exercise and diet for better recovery. Sustained health education which is culturally relevant is recommended. Communication should also include non-physical impact of stroke (such as cognitive deficits and emotional difficulties) as the stroke survivors were unlikely to relate such symptoms to stroke.
OBJECTIVES: This paper presents consensus work conducted with an international group of expert stroke recovery and rehabilitation researchers, clinicians, and people living with stroke to identify and define criteria and measurable indicators for Centers of Clinical Excellence (CoCE) in stroke recovery and rehabilitation. These were intentionally developed to be ambitious and internationally relevant, regardless of a country's development or income status, to drive global improvement in stroke services.
METHODS: Criteria and specific measurable indicators for CoCE were collaboratively developed by an international panel of stroke recovery and rehabilitation experts from 10 countries and consumer groups from 5 countries.
RESULTS: The criteria and associated indicators, ranked in order of importance, focused upon (i) optimal outcome, (ii) research culture, (iii) working collaboratively with people living with stroke, (iv) knowledge exchange, (v) leadership, (vi) education, and (vii) advocacy. Work is currently underway to user-test the criteria and indicators in 14 rehabilitation centers in 10 different countries.
CONCLUSIONS: We anticipate that use of the criteria and indicators could support individual organizations to further develop their services and, more widely, provide a mechanism by which clinical excellence can be articulated and shared to generate global improvements in stroke care.
METHODOLOGY: A phenomenological qualitative study was conducted from November 2020 to June 2021 in Malaysia. A total of 13 respondents were recruited from two public rehabilitation centers in Kota Bharu, Kelantan. In-depth interviews were conducted with the participants. Comprehensive representation of perspectives from the respondents was achieved through purposive sampling. The interviews were conducted in the Kelantanese dialect, recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using thematic analysis.
RESULTS: Three themes on burdens and experiences were identified. They were worsening pre-existing issues, emerging new issues, and fewer burdens and challenges. Two themes on coping strategies were also identified. They were problem-focused engagement and emotion-focused engagement.
CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic has changed the entire system of stroke management. While family caregivers mostly faced the extra burden through different experiences, they also encountered some positive impacts from the pandemic. The integrated healthcare system, especially in the era of digitalization, is an important element to establish the collaborative commitment of multiple stakeholders to compensate burden and sustain the healthcare of stroke survivors during the pandemic.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of a home-based carer-assisted in comparison to hospital-based therapist-delivered therapy for community-dwelling stroke survivors.
METHODS: An assessor blinded randomised controlled trial was conducted on 91 stroke survivors (mean age 58.9±10.6 years, median time post-onset 13.0 months, 76.5% males) who had completed individual rehabilitation. The control group received hospital-based group therapy delivered by physiotherapists as out-patients and the test group was assigned to a home-based carer-assisted therapy. Targeted primary outcomes were physical functions (mobility, balance, lower limb strength and gait speed). A secondary outcome index was health-related quality of life. An intention-to-treat analysis was used to evaluate outcomes at week 12 of intervention.
RESULTS: Both therapy groups improved significantly in all the functional measures; mobility (p 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: The home-based carer-assisted therapy is as effective as the hospital-based therapist-delivered training in improving post-stroke functions and quality of life.
METHODS: A systematic literature review on economic studies reporting PSC-associated data was performed in PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus/Elsevier and Cochrane databases, Google Scholar and gray literature ranging from January 2000 to August 2016. Results for post-stroke interventions (treatment and care) were systematically extracted and summarized in evidence tables reporting study characteristics and economic outcomes. Economic results were converted to 2015 US Dollars, and the total cost of PSC per patient month (PM) was calculated.
RESULTS: We included 42 studies. Overall PSC costs (inpatient/outpatient) were highest in the USA ($4850/PM) and lowest in Australia ($752/PM). Studies assessing only outpatient care reported the highest cost in the United Kingdom ($883/PM), and the lowest in Malaysia ($192/PM). Fifteen different segments of specific services utilization were described, in which rehabilitation and nursing care were identified as the major contributors.
CONCLUSION: The highest PSC costs were observed in the USA, with rehabilitation services being the main cost driver. Due to diversity in reporting, it was not possible to conduct a detailed cost analysis addressing different segments of services. Further approaches should benefit from the advantages of administrative and claims data, focusing on inpatient/outpatient PSC cost and its predictors, assuring appropriate resource allocation.
METHODS: This is an assessor-blinded randomized control trial comparing 2 types of intervention which are game-based circuit exercise (experimental group) and conventional circuit exercise (control group). Based on sample size calculation using GPower, a total number of 82 participants will be recruited and allocated into either the experimental or the control group. Participants in the experimental group will receive a set of structured game-based exercise therapy which has the components of resistance, dynamic balance and aerobic exercises. While participants in the control group will receive a conventional circuit exercise as usually conducted by physiotherapists consisting of 6 exercise stations; cycling, repeated sit to stand, upper limb exercise, lower limb exercise, stepping up/down and walking over obstacles. Both groups will perform the given interventions for 2 times per week for 12 weeks under the supervision of 2 physiotherapists. Outcomes of the interventions will be measured using 30-second chair rise test (for lower limb strength), Dynamic Gait Index (for postural stability), 6-minute walk test (aerobic capacity), Intrinsic Motivation Inventory questionnaire (for motivation level), stroke self-efficacy questionnaire (for self-efficacy) and Short Form-36 quality of life questionnaire (for quality of life). All data will be analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics.
DISCUSSION: This study will provide the information regarding the effectiveness of including game elements into circuit exercise training. Findings from this study will enable physiotherapists to design more innovative exercise therapy sessions to promote neuroplasticity and enhance functionality and quality of life among stroke survivors under their care.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN 12621001489886 (last updated 1/11/2021).
OBJECTIVES: This study was conducted to gain an insight into the experiences and views of poststroke patients and their urut Melayu practitioners.
METHODS: A qualitative study design was adopted. A total of 17 semistructured in-depth interviews were carried out with poststroke patients who were undergoing urut Melayu treatment at one of the three integrated hospitals. Information was solicited from their accompanying caregivers whenever necessary. The 2 urut Melayu practitioners at the hospital were also interviewed. All the interviews were carried out in Malay by the authors, at the Traditional and Complementary Medicine unit of the relevant hospital. The interviews were audiotaped, transcribed, and coded into categories through a constant-comparison method of data analysis. Illustrative quotations were identified to supplement the narrative descriptions of the themes.
RESULTS: It was found that urut Melayu was sought by patients who had experienced stroke brought about by hypertension and postdelivery complications. They reported the unique characteristics of urut Melayu and their positive experiences with it.
CONCLUSIONS: Urut Melayu has potential as a complementary therapy for poststroke patients. It is recommended that the number of practitioners at the Traditional and Complementary Medicine unit be increased to provide the optimum care for poststroke patients.
METHODS: This is an assessor blinded randomized controlled trial comparing 2 intervention approaches namely ART-added physiotherapy (experimental group) and usual physiotherapy (control group). A total of 70 post-stroke patients will be recruited and allocated into either the ART-added physiotherapy or the usual physiotherapy group. The ART-added physiotherapy group will undergo a 20-minute ART session followed by 40 minutes of usual physiotherapy. While the usual physiotherapy group will receive usual physiotherapy alone for 60 minutes. All participants will be treated once a week and are required to carry out a set of home exercises for 2 times per week during the 12-week intervention. Assessment of emotional status and functional independence will be carried out at pre-intervention and week 13 of the intervention with the use of Hospital anxiety and depression scale, Barthel index, and EuroQol-5 dimensions-5 levels. All data will be analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics.
DISCUSSION: The expected main study outcome is an enhanced evidence-based physiotherapy program that may be used by physiotherapists in the rehabilitation of stroke patients with emotional disturbances.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12619001664134 (last updated on 28/11/2019).
DESIGN: AVERT is a prospective, parallel group, assessor-blinded randomised clinical trial. This paper presents data assessing the generalisability of AVERT.
SETTING: Acute stroke units at 44 hospitals in 8 countries.
PARTICIPANTS: The first 20,000 patients screened for AVERT, of whom 1158 were recruited and randomised.
MODEL: We use the Proximal Similarity Model, which considers the person, place, and setting and practice, as a framework for considering generalisability. As well as comparing the recruited patients with the target population, we also performed an exploratory analysis of the demographic, clinical, site and process factors associated with recruitment.
RESULTS: The demographics and stroke characteristics of the included patients in the trial were broadly similar to population-based norms, with the exception that AVERT had a greater proportion of men. The most common reason for non-recruitment was late arrival to hospital (ie, >24 h). Overall, being older and female reduced the odds of recruitment to the trial. More women than men were excluded for most of the reasons, including refusal. The odds of exclusion due to early deterioration were particularly high for those with severe stroke (OR=10.4, p<0.001, 95% CI 9.27 to 11.65).
CONCLUSIONS: A model which explores person, place, and setting and practice factors can provide important information about the external validity of a trial, and could be applied to other clinical trials.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12606000185561) and Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01846247).
OBJECTIVES: We assessed the effectiveness of frequent higher dose very early mobilisation (VEM) after stroke.
DESIGN: We conducted a parallel-group, single-blind, prospective randomised controlled trial with blinded end-point assessment using a web-based computer-generated stratified randomisation.
SETTING: The trial took place in 56 acute stroke units in five countries.
PARTICIPANTS: We included adult patients with a first or recurrent stroke who met physiological inclusion criteria.
INTERVENTIONS: Patients received either usual stroke unit care (UC) or UC plus VEM commencing within 24 hours of stroke.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was good recovery [modified Rankin scale (mRS) score of 0-2] 3 months after stroke. Secondary outcomes at 3 months were the mRS, time to achieve walking 50 m, serious adverse events, quality of life (QoL) and costs at 12 months. Tertiary outcomes included a dose-response analysis.
DATA SOURCES: Patients, outcome assessors and investigators involved in the trial were blinded to treatment allocation.
RESULTS: We recruited 2104 (UK, n = 610; Australasia, n = 1494) patients: 1054 allocated to VEM and 1050 to UC. Intervention protocol targets were achieved. Compared with UC, VEM patients mobilised 4.8 hours [95% confidence interval (CI) 4.1 to 5.7 hours; p stroke may be associated with a more favourable outcome.
FUTURE WORK: These results informed a new trial proposal [A Very Early Rehabilitation Trial - DOSE (AVERT-DOSE)] aiming to determine the optimal frequency and dose of EM.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry number ACTRN12606000185561, Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN98129255 and ISRCTN98129255.
FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 21, No. 54. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. Funding was also received from the National Health and Medical Research Council Australia, Singapore Health, Chest Heart and Stroke Scotland, Northern Ireland Chest Heart and Stroke, and the Stroke Association. In addition, National Health and Medical Research Council fellowship funding was provided to Julie Bernhardt (1058635), who also received fellowship funding from the Australia Research Council (0991086) and the National Heart Foundation (G04M1571). The Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health, which hosted the trial, acknowledges the support received from the Victorian Government via the Operational Infrastructure Support Scheme.
METHODS: This is an assessor-blinded randomized control trial comparing 2 types of intervention which are HBT (experimental group) and usual practice (UP) (control group). Based on sample size calculation using GPower, a total number of 42 participants will be recruited and allocated into either the HBT or the UP group. Participants in HBT group will receive a set of structured exercise therapy consisting of progressive strengthening, balance and task-related exercises. While participants in UP group will receive a usual "intervention" practised by rehabilitation professional prior to discharging stroke patients from their care. Both groups are advised to perform the given interventions for 3 times per week for 12 weeks under the supervision of their caregiver. Outcomes of interventions will be measured using timed up and go test (for mobility), ten-meter walk test (for gait speed), stroke self-efficacy questionnaire (for self-efficacy) and hospital anxiety and depression scale (for anxiety level). All data will be analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics.
DISCUSSION: This study will provide the information on the effectiveness of HBT in comparison to UP among stroke population who are discharged from rehabilitation. Findings from the study will enable rehabilitation professionals to design effective discharge care plan for stroke survivors in combating functional decline when no longer receiving hospital-based therapy.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12619001182189 (last updated 22/11/2019).
AIM: The aim of this study was to classify the primary outcomes used in Cochrane Systematic Reviews (CSRs) into the ICF domains of functioning; to describe the differences in primary outcomes in reviews related to rehabilitation intervention and non-rehabilitation intervention; and to describe the trend of outcome selections according year of publication.
DESIGN: Methodological paper.
POPULATION: Adult stroke population.
METHODS: We analyzed the primary outcomes used in the CSRs published by the Cochrane Stroke Review Group up to December 2017. The primary outcomes were extracted and classified into the ICF domains of functioning (body functions, body structures and activity and participation).
RESULTS: One hundred and seventy-four papers with 216 primary outcomes were included in this analysis. Less than half (102/216, 47.2%) of the outcomes could be classified into the ICF domains of functioning. For the outcomes that could be classified into the ICF domains, the majority (72/102, 70.5%) were in the activity and participation domain, followed by body functions (26/102, 25.5%) and body structures (4/102, 4.0%). Of the outcomes that could not be classified into the ICF domains (N.=114), death (81/114, 71.1%) and recurrent stroke (21/114,18.4%) formed the majority of the outcome. There were 75 CSRs on rehabilitation related interventions; the majority of the outcomes (75/97, 77.3%) used in rehabilitation related CSRs could be classified into the ICF framework with more than half (49/75, 65.3%) in the activity and participation domain.
CONCLUSIONS: The majority of the primary outcomes selected by the Cochrane Stroke Review Group in their CSRs could not be classified into the ICF domains of functioning. Death and recurrence of vascular events remains the major outcome of interest. In rehabilitation related interventions, activity and participation domain is the functioning domain most commonly used.
CLINICAL REHABILITATION IMPACT: The systematic use of patients-centered ICF-based outcomes in CSRs could help the application of evidence in clinical decision making.