No abstract

Post-Stroke depression affects between 12% and 72% of patients who have suffered a stroke. The association between low serum levels of 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH) D) and increased risk of depression is reported in both stroke and non-stroke patients. Similarly, high 25(OH) D levels might be associated with greater functional improvement during rehabilitation program.We wanted to investigate the effects of an intensive rehabilitation on poststroke outcomes. We wondered if the daily rehabilitation of motor and cognitive functions could also have an effect on mood and functional abilities in addition to or as an alternative to vitamin D supplementation.We conducted a 12-week, randomized trial, double blind, parallel, monocentric clinical trial of 40 patients undergoing intensive neuro-rehabilitation treatment at a specialized care facility for ischemic or hemorrhagic brain stroke. Participants were randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, to 1 of 2 parallel groups: in the experimental group, 2000 IU/day of oral cholecalciferol was administered; in the control group patients were not taking vitamin D supplementation. Patients underwent a text evaluation to investigate psychological and motor outcomes.Significant intra-group difference in outcomes measures was found but not between control group and experimental group. In the vitamin D group, we highlighted significant differences between T0 and T1 in calcium (P < .001), vitamin D (P < .001), in Montgomery Aasberg Depression Rating Scale (P = .001), and in Functional Independent Measures (P < .001). In the health control group, we found a significant difference in calcium (P = .003), vitamin D (P < .001), Montgomery Aasberg Depression Rating Scale (P = 0.006), in general self-efficacy (P = .009), and in Functional Independent Measures (P < .001).Our results show that the beneficial effect on mood and functional recovery is mainly due to neurorehabilitation rather than vitamin D supplementation.

Communication constitutes an essential aspect of teamwork. This is especially true for audit teams, where communication takes place not only within the work group but also with the audit recipients. For this reason, given the poor evidence in the literature, communication training was carried out on an audit team. Training was divided into 10 meetings of two hours each, with the meetings taking place over 2 months. Questionnaires were administered to identify the characteristics and styles of communication, to assess the sense of perceived self-efficacy in general and at work, and to evaluate the knowledge inherent in the communication. This battery was administered before and after the training to evaluate its effectiveness and its effects on self-efficacy, communication style, and knowledge. Furthermore, a communication audit was performed on the feedback provided by the team, to highlight satisfaction, strengths, and any critical issues that emerged during the feedback phase. The results obtained suggest that training has an effect not only on individual knowledge but also on personological aspects. Communication among colleagues and general self-efficacy appear to be improved by the process. Self-efficacy also specifically improves in the work environment, with subjects feeling more able to manage relationships and collaborations with colleagues and supervisors. Moreover, the audit team members were satisfied with the training received, perceiving an improvement in their own communication skills during the feedback phases.