April 2019: Hanna et al (2019) Participation, Fear of Falling, and Upper Limb Impairment are Associated with High Sitting Time in People with Stroke, Occupational Therapy In Health Care, DOI: 10.1080/07380577.2019.1587675
OK, so I best confess that I’ve selected this article on the basis of the fact that it’s written by some of my closest colleagues, who I most admire, and it’s about topics that I’m very interested in! So, put that all together, and you have, in my humble opinion, a most engaging article. The investigators and their research questions exemplify the type of new knowledge that can be generated when the line between researcher, scientist and therapist, is so blurred, as to be indistinguishable.
This article is not publicly available, but you can always contact the corresponding author and request a copy. This study is an exploratory study only, but raises important questions and provides provisional answers. As always, you’ll find the abstract under Journal Club 2019 and “humble opinion” as a comment to this post.
March 2019: Westerlind et al (In Press) Drug treatment, postural control and falls: An observational cohort study of 504 patients with acute stroke, the fall study of Gothenburg. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation.
As some of you might know, I have fairly strong opinions about our approaches to reducing the risk of falls, generally, and more specifically, reducing risk in those recovering from stroke. I challenge the applying of a zero tolerance to falls, because it assumes that risk-reduction is a unilateral approach; however, in those recovering from stroke, there is the competing demand of the benefits of getting up and about! Rarely are the two issues discussed in tandem. In those recovering from stroke, we already have a cohort known to have a higher-than-average risk of falls. So, does this mean we go all out to reduce the risk of falls? Yes, but only if consideration is given to the physical, cognitive and emotional benefits of getting up-and-out and about! So, to assist us in this, let’s better understand who is most at risk and why.
In this month’s Journal Club, Westerlind et al (In press) report on their investigation of the risk of falls in acute stroke, with a particular focus on its association with postural control, and in turn, the impact of drug treatment. In my humble opinion, their findings make for very interesting reading.
This article is not publicly available; but you can always contact the corresponding author for a copy if your library doesn’t have access to the APHR journal. To find the abstract, go to Journal Club 2019 tab and select Falls and Acute Stroke from the drop-down menu. “Humble Opinion” is added as comment to this post.
Pohl et al (2018) A qualitative exploration of post-acute stroke participants’ experiences of a multimodal intervention incorporating horse riding. PLOS One, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0203933
This is the final Journal Club entry for 2018. When it comes to stroke recovery, a collective “light bulb” moment has been the realisation that the average stroke recovery environment is bereft of stimuli, interest, reasons to participate and requirements to be involved in…well, almost anything and everything. So, here’s a stroke intervention that’s completely “out of the box”! It’s yet to be proven to be clinically effective, but for the 18 participants in the horse-riding group, the experience was transformative! I’m not sure we’d have ever considered rehabilitation could be transformative. They’re powerful words indeed. To find the abstract, go to the Journal Club page and to find “Humble Opinion”, go to the attached comment.
I hope 2018 has been a transformative year for you, in the smaller and/or greater experiences of life. For me, 2018 started with great sadness, but it’s finishing with gladness as I look towards a 2019 that’s heralding change. I wish you a hugely rewarding 2019 and here’s hoping you can enjoy some relaxing time over the Christmas/New Year break, with those precious to you.
A huge thank you to all my Changing Stroke followers and to those who have participated as learners and/or educators in my CPDLife® courses. I look forward to more Journal Clubs postings in 2019, but please note that these won’t re-start until February.
Berg Balance Scale Predicts Walking
Louie DR & Eng JJ (2018) Berg Balance Scale score at admission can predict walking suitable for community ambulation at discharge from inpatient stroke rehabilitation. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 50 (1), 37-44, DOI: https://doi.org/10.2340/16501977-2280
One of my very favourite academic researchers is Janice Eng and I’m so excited, because, guess what; she’s a keynote speaker at the Stroke 2018 conference in Sydney next week. If you-re going, let’s try and catch up! Although I do realise this is a hugely challenging thing to do at scientific conferences.
Two of my very favourite topics, as CS followers will already know, are using standardised assessments to measure recovery after stroke and predicting recovery potential on the basis of stroke assessments.
So, in my humble opinion, this article is a hit for three very good reasons!
Why don’t we do this more? Why don’t we measure function at baseline or on admission to our services, and then, when we can, use that data to predict what is most likely to occur in most patients? We do this in almost every other aspect of our personal and professional lives. For example, when we calculate a housing loan with the bank, or put in the time and effort to apply for a job on the basis of our estimates on the chances we have of success. There’s more and more reason to do this in those recovering from stroke! These researchers have demonstrated you can use admission Berg Balance Scale data to predict mobility at discharge from inpatient rehabilitation.
This article is freely available. You can find the abstract in the 2018 Journal Club, and I’ve posted “humble opinion” below. If you’re in Sydney next week, why not attend the Stroke 2018 conference? Hopefully I’ll see some of you there!
June 2018: Rangaraju et al (2017) Comparison of 3-month stroke disability and quality of life across modified Rankin Scale categories. Interventional Neurology, 6, 36-41. https://doi.org/10.1159/000452634
One of the issues that continues to concern me is that we fail to consistently and routinely measure outcomes across a survivor’s recovery journey after stroke. If I were to experience a stroke here in Australia, would I have my own baseline data and/or measures across time documenting my recovery or otherwise? It’s highly, highly unlikely! Why is this the case, and in turn, how can we expect health funders to support what’s happening in facilities that support those affected by stroke?
Often health professionals will argue that the reason they’re not doing it is because of time: it just takes too much time to use standardised assessments! They may also argue that its better to spend time on interventions, not assessments! Whatever the excuse, here’s an article that has investigated a standardised assessment that takes just a split-second to reliably measure disability after stroke! The modified Rankin score (mRS), a very raw score, could be your “for starters” choice! Rangaraju et al (2017) investigated its association with quality of life. To find out what an mRS of 3 means, read what they found!
The article is freely available at https://doi.org/10.1159/000452634. Please find my “humble opinion” below, or under the Journal Club 2018 pages with the same title.
August 2017: Kang et al., (2016). Six-week Nordic Treadmill Training compared with Treadmill Training on balance, gait, and activities of daily living for stroke patients: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Stroke and Cerebrovascular Diseases, 25(4), 848-856. doi:10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2015.11.037
This month’s Journal Club is a first!! It’s the very first time that someone else has written the JC post and “humble opinion”. If you’d like to be next, please contact me via the CPDLife® contact page. My thanks to Mandy Shintani and Gabriella De Nino who nominated the article and wrote the following post. They have also added their comments (humble opinion) to the August 2017 journal club page. Thanks Mandy and Gabriella.
Post authored by Mandy and Gabriella: While awareness is increasing among therapists of the potential benefits of Nordic Walking (NW) for gait and balance retraining, there appears to be limited use of this treatment approach for those recovering from stroke, which may be attributed in part to the lack of research in this population. To date, NW has been well researched with more than 200 studies posted on PubMed regarding other conditions affecting balance, including Parkinson’s disease. Based on these studies, which found significant improvements in balance, gait speed, posture, stride length and Activities of Daily Living (ADL), the researchers hypothesize that Nordic Treadmill Training (NTT) could be tremendously effective for gait retraining after stroke. Kang et al (2016) are the first to demonstrate the benefits of NTT in terms of balance, gait and activities of daily living for participants with hemiparesis. They present results demonstrating the benefits of NTT when compared to regular treadmill training (TT). However, it is important to note that their study used a modified technique of simulating NW with the constant assistance of a therapist.
The findings of Kang et al (2016) are well worth reading. They highlight the importance of arm swing and contralateral leg movement for balance and gait. This study will hopefully pave the way for further research on regular NW which in my opinion may be safer for independent use than NTT and more cost effective in a clinical setting. NW is an exciting new treatment approach that has the potential to promote active living for those on the road to recovery. For the abstract and my comments, go to Journal Club 2017. You can access this article at https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26796052
April 2017: Ramsey et al (2017) Behavioural clusters and predictors of performance during recovery from stroke. Nature Human Behaviour, Early Online, DOI: 10.1038/s41562-016-0038
Although this may be a difficult “read”, its this month’s journal article because it challenges the way we think about stroke recovery and particular impairments or areas of dysfunction. To date, our understanding of the impact of stroke is usually in terms of differentiating between impairments. Different therapists see patients with different impairments based on their professional expertise . For example, speech pathologists manage patients with language impairments. However, what Ramsey et al found challenges this approach. In relation to recovery in the first 12 months after first-ever stroke, they have found a clustering of impairments and two behavioural domains: 1) motor and attention; and 2) language and memory. This means we may need to re-think our differentiation and management of impairments after stroke.
This article is freely available and is well worth reading. To find the abstract and “humble opinion”, go to Journal Club 2017 and select: Behavioural Domains.