This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 35/12/2873    most recent 01.STR.0000147724.83468.18v1 Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Danells, C. J. Articles by McIlroy, W. E. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Danells, C. J. Articles by McIlroy, W. E. Pubmed/NCBI databases Medline Plus Health Information Stroke Related Collections Exercise/exercise testing/rehabilitation Acute Stroke Syndromes

(Stroke. 2004;35:2873.)
© 2004 American Heart Association, Inc.

Original Contributions

Poststroke "Pushing"

Natural History and Relationship to Motor and Functional Recovery

From the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario Centre for Stroke Recovery (C.J.D., S.E.B., D.J.G., W.E.M.), Sunnybrook and Women’s College Health Science Centre, Toronto; and the Division of Neurology (S.E.B., D.J.G., W.E.M.), Department of Medicine, and the Graduate Department of Rehabilitation Sciences (S.E.B., W.E.M.), University of Toronto, Canada.

Correspondence to Dr William McIlroy, Graduate Department of Rehabilitation Science, University of Toronto, 500 University Ave, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, M5G 1V7. E-mail w.mcilroy{at}utoronto.ca

Background and Purpose— Patients with hemiparetic stroke have impaired balance control. Some patients ("pushers") are resistant to accepting weight on and actively "push" away from the nonparetic side. This research identified pushers from stroke patients with moderate to severe hemiparesis and examined longitudinal changes in symptoms, level of impairment, and functional independence.

Methods— Prospective sample of hemiparetic stroke patients (n=65) located in Toronto, Canada. Detailed clinical assessments were performed within 10 days postonset, at 6 weeks, and at 3 months.

Results— At 1 week after stroke, 63% of patients demonstrated features of pushing. In 62% of pushers, symptoms resolved by 6 weeks, whereas in 21%, pushing symptoms persisted at 3 months. Motor recovery and functional abilities at 3 months were significantly lower among the pushers compared with the nonpushers. Pushers also had a significantly longer hospital length of stay (89 days versus 57 days). It is noteworthy that motor and functional recovery improved significantly over the 3-month study period for both pushers and nonpushers.

Conclusions— Identification of stroke patients with pushing symptoms has prognostic implications for recovery. In light of this potential recovery, rehabilitation specialists need to refine treatment approaches for the pushers to further improve functional outcome.

Key Words: physical therapy techniques • prognosis • rehabilitation

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. R. Babyar, K. H. McCloskey, and M. Reding Surface Electromyography of Lumbar Paraspinal Muscles During Seated Passive Tilting of Patients With Lateropulsion Following Stroke Neurorehabil Neural Repair, March 1, 2007; 21(2): 127 - 136. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. Baccini, M. Paci, and L. A. Rinaldi The scale for contraversive pushing: a reliability and validity study. Neurorehabil Neural Repair, December 1, 2006; 20(4): 468 - 472. [Abstract] [PDF]

				Incidence and Outcomes of Poststroke "Pushing" Journal Watch Neurology, March 11, 2005; 2005(311): 3 - 3. [Full Text]