A randomized controlled trial of rehabilitation at home after stroke in southwest Stockholm. The effectiveness of community-based rehabilitation for stroke patients who remain at home: a pilot randomized trial. Effectiveness of an intensive outpatient rehabilitation program for postacute stroke patients. Comparing stroke rehabilitation outcomes between acute inpatient and nonintense home settings. Does a short period of rehabilitation in the home setting facilitate functioning after stroke? A randomized controlled trial. Improving stroke rehabilitation. A controlled study. Home or hospital for stroke rehabilitation? results of a randomized controlled trial : I: health outcomes at 6 months. A randomized controlled trial of an education and counselling intervention for families after stroke. Cluster randomized pilot controlled trial of an occupational therapy intervention for residents with stroke in UK care homes.
This study describes the methodology, patient outcome, and use of hospital and rehabilitation services at 3 months of a population-based randomized controlled trial. The purpose was to evaluate rehabilitation at home after early supported discharge from the Department of Neurology, Huddinge Hospital, for moderately disabled stroke patients in southwest Stockholm.
                The patients were eligible if they were continent, independent in feeding, had mental function within normal limits, and had impaired motor function and/or aphasia 1 week after stroke. Patients were randomized either to early supported discharge with continuity of rehabilitation at home for 3 to 4 months or to routine rehabilitation service in a hospital, day care, and/or outpatient care. The home rehabilitation team consisted of two physical therapists, two occupational therapists, and one speech therapist; one of the therapists was assigned as case manager for the patient. The rehabilitation program at home emphasized a task- and context-oriented approach. The activities were chosen on the basis of the patient's personal interests. Spouses were offered education and individual counseling. A total of 81 patients were followed up for a minimum of 3 months. Patient outcome was assessed by the Frenchay Social Activity Index, Extended Katz Index, Barthel Index, Lindmark Motor Capacity Assessment, Nine-Hole Peg Test, walking speed over 10 m, reported falls, and subjective dysfunction according to the Sickness Impact Profile. Patient use of hospital and home rehabilitation service and patient satisfaction with care were studied.
                Overall there were no statistical significant differences in outcome. Multivariate logistic regression analysis suggested a systematic positive effect for the home rehabilitation group in social activity, activities of daily living, motor capacity, manual dexterity, and walking. A considerable difference in resource use during such a 3-month period was seen. A 52% reduction in hospitalization was observed: from 29 days in the routine rehabilitation group to 14 days in the home rehabilitation group. Patient satisfaction was in favor of the latter group.
                Early supported discharge with continuity of home rehabilitation services for the majority of moderately disabled stroke patients during the first 3-month period after acute stroke is not less beneficial than routine rehabilitation and can be a rehabilitation service of choice if follow-up at 6 and 12 months confirms the suggested effectiveness and considerable reduction in use of health care. To assess the effectiveness of community-based rehabilitation for stroke patients who were not admitted to hospital in South London.
                Randomized controlled trial.
                Patients' homes in South London.
                Stroke patients not admitted to hospital after a stroke.
                Rehabilitation at home by rehabilitation team for up to three months or usual care.
                The primary outcome measure was the Barthel score. Secondary measures included the Motricity Index, Rivermead ADL, Hospital Anxiety and Depression score and Nottingham Health Profile.
                Forty-three patients who remained at home were randomized to rehabilitation team (23) or 'usual' care (20). The mean number of physiotherapy sessions was three (range 1-14) for the rehabilitation team group and two for the usual care group. Patients (with a deficit) in the rehabilitation arm of the trial were more likely to receive occupational, physical and speech therapy than those in the control arm (p = 0.03, 0.01 and 0.008, respectively). For those patients actually receiving therapy, there was no evidence that the amount received differed between the groups. However, the number of patients in each of these comparisons was very small. The outcome for patients in the rehabilitation team arm of the trial was nonsignificantly higher (0.05 < p < 0.2) than for those in the control arm for the areas of Nottingham Health Profile, anxiety, depression, caregiver strain and the proportion of patients living at home. Based on the data observed here, a trial with approximately 150 patients in each arm would be needed to have adequate power to detect a 33% difference between intervention and control groups in these outcomes.
                Community therapy support for patients not admitted to hospital is feasible but to determine whether it is cost- or clinically effective would require trials of adequate size. The effectiveness of ongoing rehabilitation services for postacute stroke survivors is poorly documented. We designed a randomized control, single-blinded study to demonstrate the effectiveness of intensive outpatient therapy. The treatment intervention consisted of 1 hr each of physical and occupational therapy, four times per week, for 12 wk; therapy focused on neuromuscular facilitation and functional tasks. All subjects were screened before the therapies and after 3 mo and 9 mo. Forty-nine stroke survivors, who were at least l yr (mean, 2.9 yr) poststroke, were randomized with two treated patients to each control (no treatment supplied). All patients had received inpatient rehabilitation at the time of their acute stroke, but no patient had any ongoing therapy within the last 6 mo. The outcome measures included the Functional Independence Measure (FIM), Brunnstrom stages of motor recovery, timed mobility tasks, and the Jebson hand evaluation. We also evaluated the level of depression, self-esteem, and socialization. The treated patients demonstrated an improvement of 6.6 points over the 3 mo of therapy compared with only 1.5 points in the control group in the FIM motor score transformed using Rasch analysis. The change from time 0 to 3 mo was significant in the treated group but not in the controls. Treated patients maintained their gains at the 9-mo follow-up, and controls lost ground. The treated group improved in terms of socialization and self-esteem as evidenced by a lower Sickness Impact Profile, whereas the controls tended to get worse. There was a trend toward less depression, but this did not reach a P = 0.05 level of significance. This study demonstrates that significant functional gains can still be attained in the postacute stroke survivor, despite prior inpatient rehabilitation services. To compare outcomes in stroke survivors who received rehabilitation services in an acute inpatient rehabilitation setting (multidisciplinary rehabilitation team) with outcomes in survivors in a home-based setting (family caregivers, limited team supervision).
                Randomized clinical trial, with mean follow-up after 60 days.
                Inpatient rehabilitation setting and home-based settings.
                Sixty patients (age range, 43-80yr) who had a stroke between 1996 and 1999 and had been referred after medical stabilization, randomly divided into 2 groups: group 1, inpatient rehabilitation; group 2, home-based rehabilitation.
                Group 1: therapeutical and neuromuscular exercises with occupational therapy with professional supervision; group 2: conventional exercises with family caregiver and limited professional supervision.
                Spasticity was evaluated with the Ashworth Scale, motor status with Brunnstrom's stages, functional status with the FIM instrument, and cognitive status with the Mini-Mental State Examination before and after rehabilitation.
                Patients rehabilitated in acute inpatient settings had better motor, functional, and cognitive outcomes (p < .05). Spasticity changes did not differ between the groups.
                Intense inpatient rehabilitation services for stroke survivors provide significantly more favorable functional and cognitive outcomes with relatively low complications than did nonintense rehabilitation efforts in home settings.
                Copyright 2001 by the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine and the American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation To assess the effect of three weeks of rehabilitation in the home setting for younger patients with stroke with the aim of improving activity level.
                A randomized controlled study with blinded evaluations at discharge, three weeks, three months and one year after discharge.
                Home of the patient or the ordinary day rehabilitation clinic at the university hospital.
                Fifty-eight patients (median age 53 years) consecutively discharged from inpatient rehabilitation with a first occurrence of stroke participated in training directly after discharge. Intervention: Rehabilitation was given for 9 hours/week over three weeks. The home group received individually tailored training, based on the patient's needs and desires, with a focus on activities in their natural context. Support and information were also given. The intervention in the day clinic group was aimed mainly at improved functions.
                The main outcome was activity, assessed with the Assessment of Motor and Process Skill (AMPS). The impairment level was also evaluated. Costs were estimated.
                There were no significant differences between the groups on any of the four assessments. However, there seemed to be an earlier improvement on some measures (including AMPS) for the home group. For both groups there was a greater improvement on the activity level than on the impairment level. the costs of the home group were less than half of the costs of the day clinic group.
                With the present results, both rehabilitation programmes could be recommended, however, further studies are needed to define patients who may specifically benefit from the home rehabilitation programme. Costs should be taken into consideration. Assessment of stroke rehabilitation is complicated by the heterogeneity of patients and settings and by difficulties in disentangling effects of organization from effects of types and amounts of treatment input.
                A prospective controlled study was undertaken in 245 stroke patients stratified into three groups according to prognosis and managed on a stroke rehabilitation unit (n = 124) or general medical wards (n = 121). Patients were randomly allocated to either setting 2 weeks after stroke and were comparable for baseline characteristics.
                Patients on general medical wards received more physiotherapy on average (16.2 +/- 7.2 versus 14.3 +/- 3.2 hours; P < .05) but similar amounts of occupational therapy (9.3 +/- 2.8 versus 9.5 +/- 3.2 hours) compared with stroke unit patients. More time was spent on individual rehabilitation on the stroke unit compared with general wards (P < .001). Functional abilities at discharge, destination of discharge, and length of hospital stay in patients with good prognosis were comparable in both settings. Patients with poor prognosis managed on general wards showed higher mortality (P < .05) and longer hospital stay (123.2 +/- 48.2 versus 52.3 +/- 19.8 days; P < .001), but functional abilities at discharge in survivors were comparable with those of stroke unit patients. Patients with intermediate prognosis had significantly better outcome on the stroke unit, with more patients being discharged home (75% versus 52%; P < .001), shorter average length of hospital stay (48.7 +/- 17.2 versus 104.6 +/- 28.6 days; P < .001), and better functional abilities at discharge (P < .05).
                Stroke units improve outcome and reduce hospital stay without increasing therapy time. Their effectiveness may be enhanced by patient selection. We wished to examine the effectiveness of an early hospital discharge and home-based rehabilitation scheme for patients with acute stroke.
                This was a randomized, controlled trial comparing early hospital discharge and home-based rehabilitation with usual inpatient rehabilitation and follow-up care. The trial was carried out in 2 affiliated teaching hospitals in Adelaide, South Australia. Participants were 86 patients with acute stroke (mean age, 75 years) who were admitted to hospital and required rehabilitation. Forty-two patients received early hospital discharge and home-based rehabilitation (median duration, 5 weeks), and 44 patients continued with conventional rehabilitation care after randomization. The primary end point was self-reported general health status (SF-36) at 6 months after randomization. A variety of secondary outcome measures were also assessed.
                Overall, clinical outcomes for patients did not differ significantly between the groups at 6 months after randomization, but the total duration of hospital stay in the experimental group was significantly reduced (15 versus 30 days; P<0.001). Caregivers among the home-based rehabilitation group had significantly lower mental health SF-36 scores (mean difference, 7 points).
                A policy of early hospital discharge and home-based rehabilitation for patients with stroke can reduce the use of hospital rehabilitation beds without compromising clinical patient outcomes. However, there is a potential risk of poorer mental health on the part of caregivers. The choice of this management strategy may therefore depend on convenience and costs but also on further evaluations of the impact of stroke on caregivers. To determine whether education and counselling after stroke leads to improved family functioning and psychosocial outcomes for stroke patients and their spouses, and better functional and social outcomes for patients.
                Two-group randomized controlled trial. Data were collected on admission to and discharge from rehabilitation, and again six months later.
                Rehabilitation units at Repatriation General Hospital and Griffith Hospital, in Adelaide, South Australia.
                Sixty-two stroke patients and their spouses, 32 in the intervention group and 30 in the control group.
                Stroke information package and three visits from a social worker trained in family counselling.
                Family functioning: McMaster Family Assessment Device (FAD); functional status: Barthel Index (BI); social recovery: Adelaide Activities Profile (AAP); depression: Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS); anxiety: Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS); mastery: Mastery Scale (MS); health status: SF-36.
                At six months the intervention group had better family functioning for both patients (mean FAD difference 0.19) and spouses (mean difference 0.09). A modest benefit in functional status for intervention patients (mean BI difference 1.3) was related to improved family functioning. Intervention patients reported better social recovery (mean AAP differences: domestic chores 5.7, household maintenance 4.6, social activities 11.5), but there were no significant effects on depression, anxiety, mastery or health status.
                An education and counselling intervention maintained family functioning, and in turn led to improved functional and social patient outcomes. This approach helps patients and their spouses to make the optimal adjustment to living with stroke. A pilot evaluation of an occupational therapy intervention to improve self-care independence for residents with stroke-related disability living in care homes was the basis of this study.
                A cluster randomized controlled trial with care home as the unit of randomization was undertaken in Oxfordshire, UK. Twelve homes (118 residents) were randomly allocated to either intervention (6 homes, 63 residents) or control (6 homes, 55 residents). Occupational therapy was provided to individuals but included carer education. The control group received usual care. Assessments were made at baseline, postintervention (3 months) and at 6-months to estimate change using the Barthel Activity of Daily Living Index (BI) scores, "poor global outcome", (defined as deterioration in BI score, or death) and the Rivermead Mobility Index.
                At 3 months BI score in survivors had increased by 0.6 (SD 3.9) in the intervention group and decreased by 0.9 (2.2) in the control group; a difference of 1.5 (95% CI allowing for cluster design, -0.5 to 3.5). At 6 months the difference was 1.9 (-0.7 to 4.4). Global poor outcome was less common in the intervention group. At 3 months, 20/63 (32%) were worse/dead in the intervention group compared with 31/55 (56%) in the control group, difference -25% (-51% to 1%). At 6 months the difference was similar, -26% (-48% to -3%). Between-group changes in Rivermead Mobility Index scores were not significantly different.
                Residents who received an occupational therapy intervention were less likely to deteriorate in their ability to perform activities of daily living.
Therapy-based rehabilitation services targeted towards stroke patients living at home appear to improve independence in personal activities of daily living. However, the evidence is derived from a review of heterogeneous interventions and therefore further exploration of the interventions is justifiable.