Three Years after In-Patient Stroke Rehabilitation: A Follow-Up Study

Löfgren, Britta; Nyberg, Lars; Mattsson, Mai; Gustafson, Yngve

doi:10.1159/000015948

Cited by 49 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Longitudinal studies on changes long term after stroke have thus far been scarce, 2,5,10,36,37 and most studies have concentrated on ADL outcome and mean changes. However, mean changes do not reflect individual changes in patients.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Susceptibility to Deterioration of Mobility Long-Term After Stroke

Port

Kwakkel

Wijk

et al. 2006

Stroke

202

117

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Purpose-The aim of the present study was to identify clinical determinants able to predict which individuals are susceptible to deterioration of mobility from 1 to 3 years after stroke. Methods-Prospective cohort study of stroke patients consecutively admitted for inpatient rehabilitation. A total of 205 relatively young, first-ever stroke patients were assessed at 1 and 3 years after stroke. Mobility status was determined by the Rivermead Mobility Index (RMI), and decline was defined as a deterioration of Ն2 points on the RMI. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify prognostic factors for mobility decline. The discriminating ability of the model was determined using a receiver operating characteristic curve. Results-A decline in mobility status was found in 21% of the patients. Inactivity and the presence of cognitive problems, fatigue, and depression at 1 year after stroke were significant predictors of mobility decline. The multivariate model showed a good fit (Hosmer-Lemeshow test PϾ0.05), and discriminating ability was good (area under the curve 0.79). Conclusions-Mobility decline is an essential concern in chronic stroke patients, especially because it might lead to activities of daily living dependence and affects social reintegration. Early recognition of prognostic factors in patients at risk may guide clinicians to apply interventions aimed to prevent deterioration of mobility status in chronic stroke.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Susceptibility to Deterioration of Mobility Long-Term After Stroke

Port

Kwakkel

Wijk

et al. 2006

Stroke

202

117

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In most of these individuals, the hemiparesis persists beyond 6 months post-stroke, limiting mobility and leading to a sedentary lifestyle. 2 The current standard of stroke care involves short-term rehabilitation therapy targeted to recovery of activities of daily living skills, after which survivors are discharged to home with exercise instructions. However, stroke survivors and their families are often too overwhelmed to focus on continued exercise beyond formal inpatient and outpatient therapies.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Reliability and validity testing of the short self-efficacy and outcome expectation for exercise scales in stroke survivors

Shaughnessy

Macko

2004

Journal of Stroke and Cerebrovascular Diseases

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…8,9 Reutter-Bernays and Rentsch 8 documented a nonsignificant decline of 11% in mean BI between discharge (median time of hospitalization, 96·5 days) and several years of follow-up. Lofgren et al 9 found a significant decrease of 13% in median score on the Fugl-Meyer motor assessment between discharge from a geriatric rehabilitation unit and 3 …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Functional and Motor Outcome 5 Years After Stroke Is Equivalent to Outcome at 2 Months

Meyer

Verheyden

Brinkmann

et al. 2015

Stroke

106

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Purpose-Recovery of patients within the first 6 months after stroke is well documented, but there has been little research on long-term recovery. The aim of this study was to analyze functional and motor recovery between admission to rehabilitation centres and 5 years after stroke. Methods-This follow-up of the Collaborative Evaluation of Rehabilitation in Stroke Across Europe study, included patients from 4 European rehabilitation centres. Patients were assessed on admission, at 2 and 6 months, and 5 years after stroke, using the Barthel Index, Rivermead Motor Assessment Gross Function, Leg and Trunk function, and Arm function. Linear mixed models were used, corrected for baseline characteristics. To account for the drop-out during follow-up, the analysis is likelihood-based (assumption of missingness at random). Results-A total of 532 patients were included in this study, of which 238 were followed up at 5 years post stroke. Mean age at stroke onset was 69 (±10 SD) years, 53% were men, 84% had ischemic strokes, and 53% had left-sided motor impairment. Linear mixed model analysis revealed a significant deterioration for all 4 outcomes between 6 months and 5 years (P<0.0001). Scores at 2 months were not statistically significant different from scores at 5 years after stroke. Higher age (P<0.0001) and increasing stroke severity on admission (P<0.0001) negatively affected long-term functional and motor recovery. Conclusions-Five-year follow-up revealed deterioration in functional and motor outcome, with a return to the level measured at 2 months. Increasing age and increasing stroke severity negatively affected recovery up to 5 years after stroke.

show abstract

Three Years after In-Patient Stroke Rehabilitation: A Follow-Up Study

Cited by 49 publications

References 17 publications

Susceptibility to Deterioration of Mobility Long-Term After Stroke

Susceptibility to Deterioration of Mobility Long-Term After Stroke

Reliability and validity testing of the short self-efficacy and outcome expectation for exercise scales in stroke survivors

Functional and Motor Outcome 5 Years After Stroke Is Equivalent to Outcome at 2 Months

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About