Objective: To investigate the effectiveness of trunk training on trunk control, sitting and standing balance and mobility. Data sources: PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), Cochrane Library, Rehab+ and ScienceDirect were searched until January 2019. Review methods: Randomized controlled trials were included if they investigated the effect of trunk exercises on balance and gait after stroke. Four reviewers independently screened and performed data extraction and risk of bias assessment with the PEDro scale. Disagreements were resolved by a fifth independent reviewer. A meta-analysis was performed to quantitatively describe the results. Results: After screening of 1881 studies, 22 studies and 394 participants met the inclusion criteria. Trunk training was executed as core stability, reaching, weight-shift or proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation exercises. The amount of therapy varied from a total of 3–36 hours between studies. The median PEDro score was 6 out of 10 which corresponds with a low risk of bias. Meta-analysis was performed with a random-effects model due to differences in study population, interventions received and follow-up length. The overall treatment effect was large for trunk control standardized mean differences (SMD) 1.08 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.96–1.31), standing balance SMD 0.84 (95% CI: 0.04–0.98) and mobility SMD 0.88 (95% CI: 0.67–1.09). Conclusions: In patients suffering from stroke, there is a strong amount of evidence showing that trunk training is able to improve trunk control, sitting and standing balance and mobility.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

WHAT THIS PAPER ADDSThe peri-operative outcome of carotid endarterectomy is still mostly reported as a composite end point of combined ipsilateral stroke and death rate, both at individual patient level and at hospital level. This paper shows that textbook outcome, a composite measure achieved for an individual patient when all undesirable outcomes are absent, could be added to individual outcome measures to better evaluate hospital performance, especially in surgical interventions with low baseline risk such as carotid interventions.Objective: Composite measures may better objectify hospital performance than individual outcome measures (IOM). Textbook outcome (TO) is an outcome measure achieved for an individual patient when all undesirable outcomes are absent. The aim of this study was to assess TO as an additional outcome measure to evaluate quality of care in symptomatic patients treated by carotid endarterectomy (CEA). Methods: All symptomatic patients treated by CEA in 2018, registered in the Dutch Audit for Carotid Interventions, were included. TO was defined as a composite of the absence of 30 day mortality, neurological events (any stroke or transient ischaemic attack [TIA]), cranial nerve deficit, haemorrhage, 30 day readmission, prolonged length of stay (LOS; > 5 days) and any other surgical complication. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify covariables associated with achieving TO, which were used for casemix adjustment for hospital comparison. For each hospital, an observed vs. expected number of events ratio (O/E ratio) was calculated and plotted in a funnel plot with 95% control limits. Results: In total, 70.7% of patients had a desired outcome within 30 days after CEA and therefore achieved TO. Prolonged LOS was the most common parameter (85%) and mortality the least common (1.1%) for not achieving TO. Covariates associated with achieving TO were younger age, the absence of pulmonary comorbidity, higher haemoglobin levels, and TIA as index event. In the case mix adjusted funnel plot, the O/E ratios between hospitals ranged between 0.63 and 1.27, with two hospitals revealing a statistically significantly lower rate of TO (with O/E ratios of 0.63 and 0.66). Conclusion:In the Netherlands, most patients treated by CEA achieve TO. Variation between hospitals in achieving TO might imply differences in performance. TO may be used as an additive to the pre-existing IOM, especially in surgical care with low baseline risk such as CEA.