[Abstract+References] A Home-Based Telerehabilitation Program for Patients With Stroke

Abstract

Background. Although rehabilitation therapy is commonly provided after stroke, many patients do not derive maximal benefit because of access, cost, and compliance. A telerehabilitation-based program may overcome these barriers. We designed, then evaluated a home-based telerehabilitation system in patients with chronic hemiparetic stroke. Methods. Patients were 3 to 24 months poststroke with stable arm motor deficits. Each received 28 days of telerehabilitation using a system delivered to their home. Each day consisted of 1 structured hour focused on individualized exercises and games, stroke education, and an hour of free play. Results. Enrollees (n = 12) had baseline Fugl-Meyer (FM) scores of 39 ± 12 (mean ± SD). Compliance was excellent: participants engaged in therapy on 329/336 (97.9%) assigned days. Arm repetitions across the 28 days averaged 24,607 ± 9934 per participant. Arm motor status showed significant gains (FM change 4.8 ± 3.8 points, P = .0015), with half of the participants exceeding the minimal clinically important difference. Although scores on tests of computer literacy declined with age (r = −0.92; P < .0001), neither the motor gains nor the amount of system use varied with computer literacy. Daily stroke education via the telerehabilitation system was associated with a 39% increase in stroke prevention knowledge (P = .0007). Depression scores obtained in person correlated with scores obtained via the telerehabilitation system 16 days later (r = 0.88; P = .0001). In-person blood pressure values closely matched those obtained via this system (r = 0.99; P < .0001). Conclusions. This home-based system was effective in providing telerehabilitation, education, and secondary stroke prevention to participants. Use of a computer-based interface offers many opportunities to monitor and improve the health of patients after stroke.

References

1.	Winstein CJ, Stein J, Arena R, . Guidelines for adult stroke rehabilitation and recovery: a guideline for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke. 2016;47:e98–e169. Google Scholar Crossref, Medline
2.	Lang CE, Macdonald JR, Reisman DS, . Observation of amounts of movement practice provided during stroke rehabilitation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2009;90:1692–1698. Google Scholar Crossref, Medline
3.	Bernhardt J, Chan J, Nicola I, Collier JM. Little therapy, little physical activity: rehabilitation within the first 14 days of organized stroke unit care. J Rehabil Med. 2007;39:43–48. Google Scholar Crossref, Medline
4.	Kimberley TJ, Samargia S, Moore LG, Shakya JK, Lang CE. Comparison of amounts and types of practice during rehabilitation for traumatic brain injury and stroke. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2010;47:851–862. Google Scholar Crossref, Medline
5.	Laver KE, Schoene D, Crotty M, George S, Lannin NA, Sherrington C. Telerehabilitation services for stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;(12):CD010255. Google Scholar Medline
6.	Agostini M, Moja L, Banzi R, . Telerehabilitation and recovery of motor function: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Telemed Telecare. 2015;21:202–213. Google Scholar Link
7.	Brennan D, Tindall L, Theodoros D, . A blueprint for telerehabilitation guidelines. Int J Telerehabil. 2010;2:31–34. Google Scholar Crossref, Medline
8.	Demiris G, Shigaki CL, Schopp LH. An evaluation framework for a rural home-based telerehabilitation network. J Med Syst. 2005;29:595–603. Google Scholar Crossref, Medline
9.	Bayley MT, Hurdowar A, Teasell R, . Priorities for stroke rehabilitation and research: results of a 2003 Canadian Stroke Network consensus conference. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2007;88:526–528. Google Scholar Crossref, Medline
10.	Wolf SL, Winstein CJ, Miller JP, . Effect of constraint-induced movement therapy on upper extremity function 3 to 9 months after stroke: the EXCITE randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2006;296:2095–2104. Google Scholar Crossref, Medline
11.	Wu J, Quinlan EB, Dodakian L, . Connectivity measures are robust biomarkers of cortical function and plasticity after stroke. Brain. 2015;138(pt 8):2359–2369. Google Scholar Crossref, Medline
12.	Jimison H, Gorman P, Woods S, . Barriers and Drivers of Health Information Technology Use for the Elderly, Chronically Ill, and Underserved. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2008. Evidence Report/Technology Assessment No. 175. AHRQ Publication No. 09-E004. Google Scholar
13.	Woldag H, Hummelsheim H. Evidence-based physiotherapeutic concepts for improving arm and hand function in stroke patients: a review. J Neurol. 2002;249:518–528. Google Scholar Crossref, Medline
14.	Takahashi CD, Der-Yeghiaian L, Le V, Motiwala RR, Cramer SC. Robot-based hand motor therapy after stroke. Brain. 2008;131(pt 2):425–437. Google Scholar Crossref, Medline
15.	Kleim JA, Jones TA. Principles of experience-dependent neural plasticity: implications for rehabilitation after brain damage. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2008;51:S225–S239. Google Scholar Crossref, Medline
16.	Cramer SC, Sur M, Dobkin BH, . Harnessing neuroplasticity for clinical applications. Brain. 2011;134(pt 6):1591–1609. Google Scholar Crossref, Medline
17.	Cramer SC. Repairing the human brain after stroke: I. Mechanisms of spontaneous recovery. Ann Neurol. 2008;63:272–287. Google Scholar Crossref, Medline
18.	Dobkin BH, Dorsch A. The promise of mHealth: daily activity monitoring and outcome assessments by wearable sensors. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2011;25:788–798. Google Scholar Link
19.	See J, Dodakian L, Chou C, . A standardized approach to the Fugl-Meyer assessment and its implications for clinical trials. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2013;27:732–741. Google Scholar Link
20.	Mackay J, Charles ST, Kemp B, Heckhausen J. Goal striving and maladaptive coping in adults living with spinal cord injury: associations with affective well-being. J Aging Health. 2011;23:158–176. Google Scholar Link
21.	Sherbourne CD, Stewart AL. The MOS social support survey. Soc Sci Med. 1991;32:705–714. Google Scholar Crossref, Medline
22.	Lewis SC, Dennis MS, O’Rourke SJ, Sharpe M. Negative attitudes among short-term stroke survivors predict worse long-term survival. Stroke. 2001;32:1640–1645. Google Scholar Crossref, Medline
23.	Williams LS, Weinberger M, Harris LE, Clark DO, Biller J. Development of a stroke-specific quality of life scale. Stroke. 1999;30:1362–1369. Google Scholar Crossref, Medline
24.	Bunz U. The Computer-Email-Web (CEW) Fluency Scale: development and validation. Int J Hum Comput Interact. 2004;17:479–506. Google Scholar Crossref
25.	Duncan P, Wallace D, Lai S, Johnson D, Embretson S, Laster L. The Stroke Impact Scale version 2.0: evaluation of reliability, validity, and sensitivity to change. Stroke. 1999;30:2131–2140. Google Scholar Crossref, Medline
26.	Jones F, Partridge C, Reid F. The Stroke Self-Efficacy Questionnaire: measuring individual confidence in functional performance after stroke. J Clin Nurs. 2008;17(7B):244–252. Google Scholar Crossref, Medline
27.	Zondervan DK, Friedman N, Chang E, . Home-based hand rehabilitation after chronic stroke: Randomized, controlled single-blind trial comparing the MusicGlove with a conventional exercise program. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2016;53:457–472. Google Scholar Crossref, Medline
28.	Page SJ, Fulk GD, Boyne P. Clinically important differences for the upper-extremity Fugl-Meyer Scale in people with minimal to moderate impairment due to chronic stroke. Phys Ther. 2012;92:791–798. Google Scholar Crossref, Medline
29.	van der Lee J, Beckerman H, Lankhorst G, Bouter L. The responsiveness of the Action Research Arm test and the Fugl-Meyer Assessment scale in chronic stroke patients. J Rehabil Med. 2001;33:110–113. Google Scholar Crossref, Medline
30.	Baranowski T, Buday R, Thompson DI, Baranowski J. Playing for real: video games and stories for health-related behavior change. Am J Prev Med. 2008;34:74–82. Google Scholar Crossref, Medline
31.	Brox E, Fernandez-Luque L, Tøllefsen T. Healthy gaming—video game design to promote health. Appl Clin Inform. 2011;2:128–142. Google Scholar Crossref, Medline
32.	Lieberman D. Designing serious games for learning and health in informal and formal settings. In: Ritterfeld M, Vorderer P eds. Serious Games: Mechanisms and Effects. New York, NY: Routeledge; 2009:117–130. Google Scholar
33.	Chou Y. Actionable Gamification—Beyond Points, Badges, and Leaderboards. Fremont, CA: Octalysis Media; 2015. Google Scholar
34.	Winstein CJ, Miller JP, Blanton S, . Methods for a multisite randomized trial to investigate the effect of constraint-induced movement therapy in improving upper extremity function among adults recovering from a cerebrovascular stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2003;17:137–152. Google Scholar Link
35.	Sluijs EM, Kok GJ, van der Zee J. Correlates of exercise compliance in physical therapy. Phys Ther. 1993;73:771–782; discussion 783-786. Google Scholar Crossref, Medline
36.	Miller KK, Porter RE, DeBaun-Sprague E, Van Puymbroeck M, Schmid AA. Exercise after stroke: patient adherence and beliefs after discharge from rehabilitation. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2017;24:142–148. Google Scholar Crossref, Medline
37.	McCabe J, Monkiewicz M, Holcomb J, Pundik S, Daly JJ. Comparison of robotics, functional electrical stimulation, and motor learning methods for treatment of persistent upper extremity dysfunction after stroke: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2015;96:981–990. Google Scholar Crossref, Medline
38.	Griffith V. A Stroke in the Family. New York, NY: Delacorte Press; 1970. Google Scholar
39.	Herrmann N, Seitz D, Fischer H, . Detection and treatment of post stroke depression: results from the registry of the Canadian stroke network. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2011;26:1195–1200. Google Scholar Medline
40.	Kothari R, Sauerbeck L, Jauch E, . Patients’ awareness of stroke signs, symptoms, and risk factors. Stroke. 1997;28:1871–1875. Google Scholar Crossref, Medline
41.	Zerwic J, Hwang SY, Tucco L. Interpretation of symptoms and delay in seeking treatment by patients who have had a stroke: exploratory study. Heart Lung. 2007;36:25–34. Google Scholar Crossref, Medline
42.	Qureshi AI, Suri MF, Guterman LR, Hopkins LN. Ineffective secondary prevention in survivors of cardiovascular events in the US population: report from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Arch Intern Med. 2001;161:1621–1628. Google Scholar Crossref, Medline
43.	Putrino D. Telerehabilitation and emerging virtual reality approaches to stroke rehabilitation. Curr Opin Neurol. 2014;27:631–636. Google Scholar Crossref, Medline
44.	Chen J, Jin W, Zhang X, Xu W, Liu X-N, Ren C-C. Telerehabilitation approaches for stroke patients: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2015;24:2660–2668. Google Scholar Crossref, Medline
45.	Nakayama H, Jorgensen H, Raaschou H, Olsen T. Recovery of upper extremity function in stroke patients: the Copenhagen Stroke Study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1994;75:394–398. Google ScholarCrossref, Medline
46.	Ottenbacher KJ, Smith PM, Illig SB, Linn RT, Ostir GV, Granger CV. Trends in length of stay, living setting, functional outcome, and mortality following medical rehabilitation. JAMA. 2004;292:1687–1695. Google Scholar Crossref, Medline
47.	Tong X, Kuklina EV, Gillespie C, George MG. Medical complications among hospitalizations for ischemic stroke in the United States from 1998 to 2007. Stroke. 2010;41:980–986. Google ScholarCrossref, Medline

Source: A Home-Based Telerehabilitation Program for Patients With StrokeNeurorehabilitation and Neural Repair – Lucy Dodakian, Alison L. McKenzie, Vu Le, Jill See, Kristin Pearson-Fuhrhop, Erin Burke Quinlan, Robert J. Zhou, Renee Augsberger, Xuan A. Tran, Nizan Friedman, David J. Reinkensmeyer, Steven C. Cramer, 2017