Posts Tagged locomotor recovery
[Abstract+References] Six hours of task-oriented training optimizes walking competency post stroke: a randomized controlled trial in the public health-care system of South Africa
To evaluate a minimal dose intervention of six 1-hour sessions of task-oriented circuit gait training including a caregiver over a 12-week period to persons post stroke in the South African public health sector.
Persons post stroke (n = 144, mean age 50 years, 72 women), mean 9.5 weeks post stroke.
Task group (n = 51)—accompanied by a caregiver; task-oriented circuit gait training (to improve strength, balance, and task performance while standing and walking). Strength group (n = 45); strength training of lower extremities while sitting and lying. Control group (n = 48); one 90-minute educational session on stroke management.
The six-minute walk test (6MinWT) was the primary outcome; the secondary outcomes included comfortable and fast gait speeds, Berg Balance Scale (BBS), and Timed Up and Go (TUG). Particpants evaluated at baseline, post intervention (12 weeks), and at follow-up 12 weeks later. Change scores were compared using generalized repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA).
Task group change scores for all outcomes post intervention and at follow-up were improved compared to the other groups (P-values between 0.000005 and 0.04). The change scores (mean, 1SD) between baseline and follow-up for the Task, Strength, and Control groups, respectively, were as follows: 6MinWT:119.52 m (81.92), 81.05 m (79.53), and 60.99 m (68.38); comfortable speed 0.35 m/s (0.23), 0.24 m/s (0.22), and 0.19 m/s (0.21); BBS: 9.94 (7.72), 6.93 (6.01), and 5.19 (4.80); and TUG: –14.24 seconds (16.86), –6.49 seconds (9.88), and –5.65 seconds (8.10).
|1.||Feigin, VL, Lawes, CM, Bennett, DA. Worldwide stroke incidence and early case fatality reported in 56 population-based studies: a systematic review. Lancet Neurol 2009; 8: 355–369. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline, ISI|
|2.||Connor, M, Thorogood, M, Casserly, B. Prevalence of stroke survivors in rural South Africa: results from the Southern Africa Stroke Prevention Initiative (SASPI) Agincourt field site. Stroke 2004; 35: 627–632. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|3.||Mudzi, W, Stewart, A, Musenge, E. Community participation of patients 12 months post-stroke in Johannesburg, South Africa. Afr J Prim Health Care Fam Med 2013; 5(1): 426. Google Scholar, Crossref|
|4.||Richards, CL, Malouin, F, Wood Dauphinee, S. Task-specific physical therapy for optimization of gait recovery in acute stroke patients. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1993; 74: 612–620. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|5.||Dean, CM, Richards, CL, Malouin, F. Task-related circuit training improves performance of locomotor tasks in chronic stroke: a randomized, controlled pilot trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2000; 81: 409–417. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline, ISI|
|6.||Salbach, NM, Mayo, NE, Wood-Dauphinee, S. A task-orientated intervention enhances walking distance and speed in the first year post stroke: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Rehabil 2004; 18: 509–519. Google Scholar, Link, ISI|
|7.||Wevers, L, van, de, Port, I, Vermue, M. Effects of task-oriented circuit class training on walking competency after stroke: a systematic review. Stroke 2009; 40: 2450–2459. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|8.||Perry, J, Garrett, M, Gronley, JK. Classification of walking handicap in the stroke population. Stroke 1995; 26: 982–989. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline, ISI|
|9.||Kosak, M, Smith, T. Comparison of the 2-, 6-, and 12-minute walk tests in patients with stroke. J Rehabil Res Dev 2005; 42: 103–107. Google Scholar, Medline|
|10.||Tang, A, Eng, J, Rand, D. Relationship between perceived and measured changes in walking after stroke. J Neurol Phys Ther 2012; 36: 115–121. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|11.||Salbach, NM, Mayo, NE, Higgins, J. Responsiveness and predictability of gait speed and other disability measures in acute stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2001; 82: 1204–1212. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|12.||Wade, DT. Measurement in neurological rehabilitation. Curr Opin Neurol 1992; 5: 682–686. Google Scholar|
|13.||Tilson, JK, Sullivan, KJ, Cen, SY. Meaningful gait speed improvement during the first 60 days poststroke: minimal clinically important difference. Phys Ther 2010; 90: 196–208. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline, ISI|
|14.||Berg, K, Wood-Dauphinee, S, Williams, JI. The Balance Scale: reliability assessment with elderly residents and patients with an acute stroke. J Rehabil Med 1995; 27: 27–36. Google Scholar|
|15.||Stevenson, TJ. Detecting change in patients with stroke using the Berg balance scale. Aust J Physiother 2001; 47: 29–38. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|16.||Flansbjer, UB, Holmback, AM, Downham, D. Reliability of gait performance tests in men and women with hemiparesis after stroke. J Rehabil Med 2005; 37: 75–82. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline, ISI|
|17.||Mudzi, W, Stewart, A, Musenge, E. Effect of carer education on functional abilities of patients with stroke. Int J Ther Rehabil 2012; 19(7): 380–385. Google Scholar, Crossref|
|18.||Carr, JH, Shepherd, RB. Neurological rehabilitation: optimizing motor performance. Toronto, ON, Canada; Edinburgh: Elsevier, 2010. Google Scholar|
|19.||Veerbeek, J, van Wegen, E, van Peppen, R. What is the evidence for physical therapy poststroke? A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS ONE 2014; 9: e87987. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline, ISI|
|20.||Kim, CM, Eng, JJ, MacIntyre, DL. Effects of isokinetic strength training on walking in persons with stroke: a double-blind controlled pilot study. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis 2001; 10(6): 265–273. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|21.||Duncan, P, Sullivan, K, Behrman, A. Body-weight-supported treadmill rehabilitation after stroke. N Engl J Med 2011; 364: 2026–2036. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline, ISI|
|22.||Van de Port, IGL, Wevers, LEG, Lindeman, E. Effects of circuit training as alternative to usual physiotherapy after stroke: randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2012; 344: e2672. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|23.||Richards, CL, Malouin, F, Bravo, G. The role of technology in task-oriented training in persons with subacute stroke: a randomized controlled trial. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2004; 18: 199–211. Google Scholar, Link, ISI|
|24.||Lohse, KR, Lang, CE, Boyd, LA. Is more better? Using metadata to explore dose–response relationships in stroke rehabilitation. Stroke 2014; 45: 2053–2058. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|25.||Tipping, B, de Villiers, L, Wainwright, H. Stroke in patients with human immunodeficiency virus infection. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2007; 78: 1320–1324. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|26.||Kugler, C, Altenhöner, T, Lochner, P. Does age influence early recovery from ischemic stroke? A study from the Hessian Stroke Data Bank. J Neurol 2003; 250: 676–681. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|27.||Stineman, MG, Fiedler, RC, Granger, CV. Functional task benchmarks for stroke rehabilitation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1998; 79: 497–504. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|28.||Bagg, S, Pombo, A, Hopman, W. Effect of age on functional outcomes after stroke rehabilitation. Stroke 2002; 33: 179–185. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline, ISI|
|29.||Africa, SS. Monthly earnings of South Africans, 2010, http://www.statssa.gov.za/publications/P02112/P021122010.pdf (accessed 13 February 2017). Google Scholar|
|30.||Africa, SS. National Household Travel Survey 2013: statistical release P0320. Statistics South Africa, http://www.statssa.gov.za/publications/P0320/P03202013.pdf (accessed 30 January 2017). Google Scholar|
|31.||Knox, M, Stewart, A, Richards, CL. Similarities in the effect of different rehabilitation programmes on stroke survivors who are living with HIV and those without HIV. Physiotherapy 2015; 101: e768–e769. Google Scholar|
|32.||Vloothuis, JDM, Mulder, M, Veerbeek, JM. Caregiver-mediated exercises for improving outcomes after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016; 12: CD011058. Google Scholar, Medline|
|33.||Dobkin, B. Behavioral self-management strategies for practice and exercise should be included in neurologic rehabilitation trials and care. Curr Opin Neurol 2016; 29: 693–699. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|34.||Mayo, N. Stroke rehabilitation at home: lessons learned and ways forward. Stroke 2016; 47: 1685–1691. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|35.||Gudberg, C, Johansen-Berg, H. Sleep and motor learning: implications for physical rehabilitation after stroke. Front Neurol 2015; 6: 241. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|36.||Kaseke, F, Gwanzura, L, Hakim, J. Target needs analysis for people who have survived stroke and their caregivers in local communities in Zimbabwe. Cent Afri J Med 2017; 63(1–3): 7–14. Google Scholar|
|37.||Kaseke, F, Stewart, A, Gwanzura, L. Clinical characteristics and outcome of patients with stroke admitted to tree tertiary hospitals in Zimbabwe: a retrospective one year study. Malawi Med J 2017; 29(2): 177–182. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
via Six hours of task-oriented training optimizes walking competency post stroke: a randomized controlled trial in the public health-care system of South Africa – Megan Knox, Aimee Stewart, Carol L Richards, 2018
[ARTICLE] Effects of Robot-assisted Gait Training Combined with Functional Electrical Stimulation on Recovery of Locomotor Mobility in Chronic Stroke Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial – Full Text HTML
[Purpose] The purpose of the present study was to investigate the effects of robot-assisted gait training combined with functional electrical stimulation on locomotor recovery in patients with chronic stroke.
[Subjects] The 20 subjects were randomly assigned into either an experimental group (n = 10) that received a combination of robot-assisted gait training and functional electrical stimulation on the ankle dorsiflexor of the affected side or a control group (n = 10) that received robot-assisted gait training only.
[Methods] Both groups received the respective therapies for 30 min/day, 3 days/week for 5 weeks. The outcome was measured using the Modified Motor Assessment Scale (MMAS), Timed Up-and-Go Test (TUG), Berg Balance Scale (BBS), and gait parameters through gait analysis (Vicon 370 motion analysis system, Oxford Metrics Ltd., Oxford, UK). All the variables were measured before and after training.
[Results] Step length and maximal knee extension were significantly greater than those before training in the experimental group only. Maximal Knee flexion showed a significant difference between the experimental and control groups. The MMAS, BBS, and TUG scores improved significantly after training compared with before training in both groups.
[Conclusion] We suggest that the combination of robot-assisted gait training and functional electrical stimulation encourages patients to actively participate in training because it facilitates locomotor recovery without the risk of adverse effects.