From the Center on Aging, University of Kansas Medical Center (P.D.,
L.R., D.W., J.S-Y., P.P., C.L., S.S.); Department of Veterans Affairs Medical
Center, Kansas City (P.D., S.S.); and Departments of Health Services
Administration (P.D.), Physical (P.P.) and Occupational Therapy (L.R.),
Internal Medicine (S.S.), Preventive Medicine (D.W.), and Physical Medicine
and Rehabilitation (A.O.), School of Engineering, University of Kansas (C.L.),
Kansas City, Kan.
Correspondence to Pamela Duncan, PhD, PT, University of Kansas Medical Center, Center on Aging, 3901 Rainbow Blvd, Kansas City, KS 66160-7117. E-mail pduncan{at}kumc.edu
MethodsTwenty minimally and moderately impaired stroke patients
who had completed inpatient rehabilitation and who were 30 to 90 days
after stroke onset were randomized to a control group or to an
experimental group that received a therapist-supervised, 8-week,
3-times-per-week, home-based exercise program. The control group
received usual care as prescribed by the patients' physicians.
Baseline and postintervention assessments included the Fugl-Meyer Motor
Assessment, the Barthel Index of Activities of Daily Living (ADL), the
Lawton Scale of Instrumental ADL, and the Medical Outcomes Study36
Health Status Measurement. Functional assessments of balance and gait
included a 10-m walk, 6-Minute Walk, and the Berg Balance Scale. Upper
extremity function was evaluated by the Jebsen Test of Hand
Function.
ResultsOf 22 patients who met study criteria, 20 completed the
study and 2 refused to participate. The experimental group tended to
improve more than the control group in motor function (Fugl-Meyer Upper
Extremity: mean change in score, 8.4 versus 2.2; Fugl-Meyer Lower
Extremity: 4.7 versus -0.9; gait velocity: median change, 0.25 versus
.09 m/s; 6-Minute Walk: 195 versus 114 ft; Berg Balance Score: 7.8
versus 5; and Medical Outcomes Study36 Health Status Measurement of
Physical Function: 15.5 versus 9). There were no trends in differences
in change scores by the Jebsen Test of Hand Function, Barthel Index,
and Lawton Instrumental ADL Scale.
ConclusionsThis study demonstrated that a randomized, controlled
clinical trial of a poststroke exercise program is feasible. Measures
of neurological impairments and lower extremity function showed the
most benefit. Effects of the intervention on upper extremity dexterity
and functional health status were equivocal. The lasting effects of the
intervention were not assessed.
Individuals with mild strokes may have significant impairments in
postural control and gait velocity.6 7 8 9 The
6-month incidence of falls among individuals with mild to moderate
stroke has been reported to be 73%. Forty-seven percent of this cohort
fell more than once, and 24% could not get up after they
fell.10 Many stroke survivors are physically
deconditioned and have a high prevalence of
cardiovascular risk factors and problems that are
potentially modifiable with exercise.11 12
Current approaches to stroke rehabilitation are characterized by
multiple, conflicting, and unsubstantiated treatment philosophies and a
tendency to invest efforts in those with severe stroke and in goals
limited to self-care.13 14 15 For the most part,
physical interventions for stroke are targeted to functional training
such as dressing, transfers, and gait. A recent review of the
literature through 1994 found limited evidence to support
recommendations for specific exercise interventions for stroke
survivors.16 Emerging evidence suggests that
intensive remedial therapy may be beneficial for stroke
survivors.17 Two recent trials have explored the
benefits of aerobic training in chronic stroke
patients.12 18 These studies suggest that
individuals with stroke experience improved
cardiovascular function and some demonstrated improved
motor recovery with aerobic conditioning interventions. While some
proportion of stroke disability may be permanent, optimal therapy might
further reduce disability.
To our knowledge, no study has combined all 3 components (strength,
balance, and endurance) into 1 intervention for individuals with
stroke. We developed an intensive home-based exercise program based on
evidence from prior exercise interventions for elderly individuals and
stroke survivors. Our intervention targeted individuals who had
experienced mild and moderate strokes because they often retain
significant deficits that may not have received specific interventions
and they are likely to have secondary deconditioning. The purposes of
this pilot study were to (1) develop an exercise intervention based on
principles of exercise physiology and motor learning and to deliver it
in the home to individuals with mild or moderate strokes, (2) evaluate
the feasibility of the intervention and the ability to recruit and
retain stroke subjects, and (3) assess the effects of the
interventions.
Subjects
Exclusion criteria were (1) a medical condition that interfered with
outcome assessments or limited participation in submaximal exercise
program, (2) a Mini-Mental State score <18,22 or
(3) receptive aphasia that interfered with the ability to follow a
3-step command. As part of the enrollment, medical records from the
Kansas City Stroke Study Registry were reviewed to determine each
subject's demographics, stroke onset, and stroke type.
Procedures
Stroke severity was assessed by the following scales:
Orpington Prognostic Scale
The Orpington Prognostic Scale21 is a
brief screen that includes assessment of motor function of the arm,
upper extremity proprioception, balance, and 10 cognitive questions.
The best possible Orpington score is 1.6.
Fugl-Meyer Motor Score
The Fugl-Meyer Motor Score20 is probably
the most widely known scale of motor recovery after stroke. The
Fugl-Meyer includes items of upper and lower extremity function that
require progressively more complex movements and hand grasps and
measure speed and coordination. Each item is graded on a 3-point
scale (0, cannot perform; 1, partially performs; 2, performs fully).
The maximum score for upper extremity motor performance is 66
and for the lower extremity 34.
The following functional assessments were also performed:
Barthel Index Activities of Daily Living
The Barthel Index Activities of Daily Living
(ADL)23 is a weighted scale of 10 items of basic
ADL including feeding, bathing, grooming, dressing, bladder and bowel
control, chair/bed transfer, ambulation, and stair climbing. The
highest possible score of the Barthel Index is 100.
Lawton Instrumental Activities of Daily Living
The Lawton Instrumental ADL24 is a
self-reported assessment of 9 activities: phone use, shopping, getting
to places out of walking distance, meal preparation, housework,
handyman work, laundry, medication management, and money management.
All items are scored on a 3-point scale (3, can do without help; 2, can
do with some help; and 1, completely unable to do). The maximum score
on the Lawton IADL is 27.
Medical Outcomes Study36 Health Status Measurement
The Medical Outcomes Study36 Health Status Measurement
(MOS-36)25 is a self-report assessment that
includes 8 domains (physical functioning, emotional role functioning,
social role function, mental health, vitality, physical role, general
health, and bodily pain.) Each domain is scored with a transformed
scale of 100. Question 3 of the MOS-36 represents the physical
functioning domain. It includes 10 items (vigorous activities; moderate
activities; lifting or carrying groceries; climbing 1 flight of stairs;
bending, kneeling, or stooping; walking several blocks; walking 1
block; and bathing or dressing).
Functional assessments of balance and gait included the following:
10-Meter Walk
The 10-meter walk is a measure of gait velocity. Individuals
were given a 3-m warm-up distance. The time it took to traverse 10
m at the subject's usual pace was recorded. Two trials were
averaged to determine gait velocity.
6-Minute Walk
The 6-Minute Walk26 is a measure that was
originally developed to assess cardiopulmonary function. In
this test, subjects were given 6 minutes to walk as far as they could
at their usual pace. The distance they covered in 6 minutes was
recorded. Subjects were allowed to stop and rest as they deemed
necessary.
Berg Balance Scale
The Berg Balance Scale27 consists of 14
items that require subjects to maintain positions of varying difficulty
and perform specific tasks such as rising from a chair and timed
stepping. Each item is graded from 0 to 4. The maximum possible score
on the Berg Balance Scale is 56 points.
Jebsen Test of Hand Function
Upper extremity function was evaluated with the Jebsen Test of
Hand Function.28 The Jebsen is a standardized
assessment of the time it takes to perform hand activities. These
include the following: writing a short sentence, turning over 3x5
cards, picking up small objects, stacking checkers, simulated eating,
moving empty large cans, and moving weighted cans. Time of
performance is recorded for each test. For the purposes of
our analysis, we developed an ordinal scoring of change in time
to do the activity between pretest and posttest (0,
Randomization
Intervention
Therabands are elastic bands of varying elasticity used as a means to
provide resistance. Functional exercises in which body weight was used
for resistance were also included. Assistive-resistive exercises that
included PNF patterns were used only if the patient was too weak to use
the elastic bands. Resistance progression was based on a protocol in
which when subjects could complete 2 sets of 10 repetitions through the
available range of motion, resistance was increased by progression of
Theraband elasticity (levels of resistance) or by increased manual
resistance in PNF exercises. The second block included 15 minutes of
balance exercises, which were progressively ordered by difficulty. In
the third block, participants were encouraged to use the affected upper
extremity in functional activities. The final session included a
progressive walking program or progressive exercise on a bicycle
ergometer. The detailed protocol of the intervention used is available
from the authors.
Exercise stress testing was not included in baseline assessment;
therefore, progression of the aerobic component of the program was
conservative. Individuals were instructed to walk at their usual pace
or bicycle at low revolutions per minute. The patients were then
encouraged to increase their exercise time until they could exercise
continuously for 20 minutes. Heart rate and blood pressure were
monitored during the exercise sessions.
Subjects in the control group received usual care as prescribed by
their physicians. Participants in this group were visited by a research
assistant every 2 weeks to assess the patients' exercise and activity
level. The clinicians providing therapeutic interventions to the usual
care group were asked to complete an intervention log to capture type
of exercises and frequency and duration of therapy visits during
treatment or in a home exercise program. The study coordinator met with
the treating therapists at least twice to discuss the therapy logs and
intervention programs.
Statistical Analysis
Usual Care Therapy
Experimental Therapy
Effect on Motor Recovery
Effect on Functional Performance
Effect on Functional Status
This pilot study provided useful information about the feasibility of
the experimental intervention. Our subjects tolerated the 1.5-hour
intervention and were able to progress in intensity and duration of
exercises. However, our experience suggests that our interventions were
of insufficient duration and/or intensity to maximize aerobic capacity.
Our original intent was to challenge endurance with a progressive
walking program. Pragmatically, our experimental subjects did not have
adequate space in their homes, nor were they community ambulators.
After 7 subjects participated in the walking program, we switched from
walking as a means to enhance cardiovascular endurance
to cycle ergometers that were left in the patient's home. We believe
that in future studies we need to stress the
cardiovascular system with increased intensity and
duration. However, increased intensity will require more extensive
cardiac assessment and a stress test. Future studies will include a
cardiovascular stress test.
Intervening comorbidities in 1 experimental subject prolonged his
therapy program. We followed the "intent to treat"
rule32 in our analysis and did not
exclude this subject from primary analysis. An analysis
in which the subject with intervening comorbidities was excluded
changed only 1 result. The change in Fugl-Meyer Upper Extremity scores
with this subject excluded was significantly greater
(0.025<P<0.05) for the experimental group. Randomized
clinical trials of stroke interventions may be complicated by
intervening comorbidities, which may restrict therapies or require
additional therapies. The possibility of intervening comorbidities
should be considered in the design of future studies.
This study demonstrated that a randomized, controlled clinical trial of
a specific postdischarge rehabilitation intervention is feasible.
Variability in usual care makes a usual care group appropriate for
controls. The control group received a comparable number of treatment
sessions and duration of treatment sessions if the individual
occupational therapy and physical therapy sessions are counted as 1
session. The differences in programs were most evident in the types of
interventions. For example, none of the members of the control group
received endurance training. Larger differences in effect might have
been expected if the experimental group was compared with a group that
did not receive any intervention. However, a "no therapy" group is
not an acceptable option to subjects or healthcare providers at the
present time.
This pilot study demonstrated that individuals with stroke can make
gains in function beyond that which occurs with usual care. The gains
were apparent for lower extremity motor function and gait speed. There
was a trend in effects for upper extremity motor function, improved
balance, 6-minute walk time, and physical functioning (MOS-36). The
lasting effects of these changes were not assessed. There were,
however, no trends in effects for ADL, instrumental ADL, 7 domains of
the MOS-36, or speed of upper extremity movement. The functional
consequences of these gains are not known and will require a larger
sample size in which interactions may be tested. Some important
interacting factors may be size and location of lesion, depression,
comorbidities, and self-efficacy.
Conclusions on the response to the interventions are complicated by
sensitivity of measures to change. The Barthel Index has a well-known
ceiling effect. The mean Barthel Index score at baseline for these
individuals was 82.5, leaving little range for improvement. At
follow-up, the mean Barthel Index scores for both groups were similar
(95.5 and 95.6). However, the Jebsen Test of Hand Function
demonstrated floor effects. The Jebsen Test of Hand Function assesses
speed of primary movements of the affected extremity. Although
qualitative improvements were apparent and individuals gained in their
ability to use their upper extremity as a functional assist, these
changes were not captured by the Jebsen Test of Hand Function.
There are several limitations of this study. First, this study is a
pilot randomized, controlled trial with a small sample. A larger
randomized, controlled clinical trial is needed to confirm the benefits
of the intervention. Second, we did not have MRI results available to
establish size and site of lesion. Characteristics of the lesion may
explain the variability in responsiveness to the intervention. Third,
we do not yet know the ideal timing of the intervention (early or late
after stroke). We chose to initiate this study 30 to 90 days after
stroke. Most spontaneous stroke recovery occurs in the first 30 days
after stroke.33 However, recovery continues for 6
months. We selected this period to decrease effects of spontaneous
recovery on our results but still be in a period of some ongoing
recovery. Our results will not contribute to understanding the most
appropriate timing for intervention.
Conclusion
There is increased pressure to discharge individuals with stroke to the
community as soon as possible. The individuals may be discharged with
significant residual deficits and limitations in function. In the past
there has been no consensus about how to provide therapies to achieve
the best outcomes. Effective home-based postacute rehabilitation
interventions are extremely important since acute and postacute stays
have been significantly decreased. Objective evidence of the benefits
of therapeutic interventions for home-based programs is essential to
ensure reimbursement from payors. Randomized clinical trials provide
the most convincing evidence for the efficacy of interventions. This
pilot study demonstrated that (1) a randomized clinical trial is
possible in postdischarge stroke rehabilitation, (2) the intervention
may be home based, and (3) a very structured intervention program to
improve strength, balance, endurance, and bimanual activities may be
effective.
Received March 9, 1998;
revision received July 20, 1998;
accepted July 20, 1998.
2.
Barker WH, Mullooly JP. Stroke in a defined elderly
population. Stroke. 1997;28:284290.
3.
Jorgensen HS, Nakayama H, Raaschou HO, Vive-Larsen J,
Stoier M, Olsen TS. Outcome and time course of recovery in stroke, part
1: Outcome of the Copenhagen Stroke Study. Arch Phys Med
Rehabil. 1995;76:399405.[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
4.
Jorgensen HS, Nakayama H, Raaschou HO, Vive-Larsen J,
Stoier M, Olsen TS. Outcome and time course of recovery in stroke, part
2: time course of recovery: the Copenhagen Stroke Study. Arch
Phys Med Rehabil.. 1995;76:406412.[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
5.
Wolf PA, Cobb JL, D'Agostino R.
Epidemiology of stroke. In: Barnet HJM, Stein
BM, Mohr JP, Yatsu FM, eds. Stroke Pathophysiology, Diagnosis and
Treatment. New York, NY: Churchill Livingstone; 1992:329.
6.
DiFabio RP, Badke MB, Duncan PW. Adapting human
postural reflexes following localized cerebrovascular accident.
Brain Res. 1986;363:264277.
7.
Wade DT, Wood VA, Heller A, Maggs J, Langton-Hewer R.
Walking after stroke: measurement and recovery over the first 3 months.
Scand J Rehabil Med. 1987;19:2530.[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
8.
Jorgensen HS, Nakayama H, Raaschou HO, Olsen TS.
Recovery of walking function in stroke patients: the Copenhagen study.
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1995;76:2732.[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
9.
Keenan MA, Perry J, Jordon C. Factors affecting
balance and ambulation following stroke. Clin Orthop. 1984;182:165171.
10.
Forster A, Young J. Incidence and consequences of
falls due to stroke: a systematic inquiry. BMJ. 1995;311:8384.
11.
Roth EJ. Heart disease in patients with stroke:
incidence, impact and implications for rehabilitation, part 1:
classification and prevalence. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1993;74:752760.[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
12.
Potempa K, Lopez M, Braun L, Szidon P, Fogg L,
Tincknell Tyler. Physiological outcomes of aerobic
exercise training in hemiparetic stroke patients. Stroke. 1995;26:101105.
13.
Carr J, Mungovan SF, Shepard R, Dean CM, Norholm LA.
Physiotherapy in stroke rehabilitation: bases for Australian
physiotherapists' choice of treatment. Physiother Pract. 1994;10:201209.
14.
Nilason LM, Nordholom LA. Physical therapy in stroke
rehabilitation: bases for Swedish physiotherapy practice.
Physiother Pract. 1992;8:4955.
15.
Wade DT, Skilbeck CE, Hewer L, Wood V. Therapy after
stroke: amount, determinants and effects. J Int Rehabil
Med. 1984;6:105110.
16.
Gresham GE, Duncan PW, Stason WB. Post-stroke
Rehabilitation Clinical Practice Guidelines No. 16. Rockville, Md:
US Dept of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Agency for
Health Care Policy and Research; 1995. Publication AHCPR 95-0662.
17.
Langhorne P, Wagenaar R, Partridge C. Physiotherapy
after stroke: more is better? Physiother Res Int.. 1996;1:7588.[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
18.
Macko RF, DeSouza CA, Tretter LD, Silver KH, Smith GV,
Anderson PA, Tomasyasu N, Gorman P, Dengel DR. Treadmill aerobic
exercise training reduces the energy expenditure and
cardiovascular demands of hemiparetic gait in chronic
stroke patients. Stroke. 1997;28:326330.
19.
World Health Organization. Stroke 1989: recommendations
on stroke prevention, diagnostics and therapy: report of
the WHO Task Force on Stroke and Other Cerebrovascular Disorders.
Stroke. 1989:20:14071431.
20.
Fugl-Meyer AR, Jaasko L, Leyman I, Olsson S, Steglind
S. The post-stroke hemiplegic patient: method for evaluation of
physical performance. Scand J Rehabil Med. 1975;7:1331.[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
21.
Kalra L, Crome P. The role of prognostic scores in
targeting stroke rehabilitation in elderly patients. J Am
Geriatr Soc. 1993;41:396400.[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
22.
Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR. Mini Mental State:
a practical method for grading cognitive state of patients.
J Psych Res. 1975;12:189198.
23.
Mahoney FI, Barthel DW. Functional evaluation: the
Barthel Index. Md State Med J. 1965;41:6165.
24.
Lawton MP. Instrumental Activities of Daily Living
(IADL) Scale: self-rate version. Psychopharmacol Bull. 1988;24:789791.[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
25.
Ware JE, Sherbourne CD. MOS-36 item short form health
survey (SF-36): conceptual framework and item selection. Med
Care. 1992;30:473483.[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
26.
Guyatt GH, Sullivan MJ, Thompson PJ. The 6-Minute Walk:
a new measure of exercise capacity in patients with chronic heart
failure. Can Med Assoc J. 1985;132:919923.[Abstract]
27.
Berg K, Wood-Dauphinee S, Williams JI. The balance
scale: reliability assessment with elderly residents and patients with
acute stroke. Scand J Rehabil Med. 1995;27:2736.[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
28.
Jebsen RH, Taylor N, Trieschmann RB, Trotter MJ, Howard
LA. An objective and standardized test of hand function. Arch
Phys Med Rehabil. 1969;45:311319.
29.
Voss DE, Ionta MK, Myers BJ. Proprioceptive
Neuromuscular Facilitation Patterns and Techniques. 3rd ed.
Philadelphia, Pa: Harper & Row Publishers, Inc; 1985.
30.
Conover WJ. Practical Nonparametric
Statistics. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc; 1980:chap 5.
31.
Rosner B. Fundamentals of
Biostatistics. 4th ed. Belmont, Calif: Duxbury Press;
1995:chap 10.
32.
Meinert CL. Clinical Trials: Design, Conduct and
Analysis. New York, NY: Oxford Press; 1986.
33.
Duncan PW, Lai SM. Stroke recovery. Top Stroke
Rehabil. 1997;4:5158.
© 1998 American Heart Association, Inc.
Original Contributions
A Randomized, Controlled Pilot Study of a Home-Based Exercise Program for Individuals With Mild and Moderate Stroke
![]()
Abstract
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Subjects and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
Background and PurposeMany
stroke survivors have minimal to moderate neurological deficits but are
physically deconditioned and have a high prevalence of
cardiovascular problems; all of these are potentially
modifiable with exercise. The purposes of this randomized, controlled
pilot study were (1) to develop a home-based balance, strength, and
endurance program; (2) to evaluate the ability to recruit and retain
stroke subjects; and (3) to assess the effects of the
interventions used.
Key Words: exercise rehabilitation stroke management
![]()
Introduction
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Subjects and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
Stroke disability may persist for life and limits
independence and quality of life, even in those deemed recovered on the
basis of independence in self-care.1 The
incidence of stroke has remained constant over the last 3 decades, but
mortality and stroke severity have declined.2 The
majority of individuals who survive a stroke have minimal to moderate
neurological deficits,3 4 and >50% of them are
expected to be alive in 5 years.5 The increasing
number of persons surviving with less severe stroke results in
increased need for programs to enhance their recovery, improve
functional status, and optimize quality of life.
![]()
Subjects and Methods
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Subjects and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
Research Design
In this randomized controlled pilot study, 20 individuals with
mild to moderate strokes who had completed acute rehabilitation and who
were 30 to 90 days after onset were randomized to a 12-week (8-week
therapist-supervised program and 4-week independent program) home-based
intervention (experimental group) to improve strength, balance, and
endurance or to usual care (control group).
Subjects were recruited from local participating hospitals and
the registry of the Kansas City Stroke Study. The Kansas City Stroke
Study is an ongoing prospective cohort study of individuals with stroke
who were admitted to 12 participating hospitals in the greater Kansas
City area. Individuals enrolled in the Kansas City Stroke Study were
evaluated within 14 days after stroke and reassessed at 1 month, 3
months, and 6 months after stroke to characterize recovery of
neurological impairments, functional abilities, and health status. For
the purpose of the Kansas City Stroke Study, a stroke is defined as
"symptoms of rapid onset and of presumed vascular origin reflecting a
focal disturbance of cerebral function, excluding isolated
impairment of higher function."19 Subjects
selected from the Kansas City Stroke Study Registry were screened for
eligibility, and informed consent was obtained from each participant as
well as from each participant's physician. Specific inclusion criteria
for participation in this pilot study were (1) 30 to 90 days after
stroke; (2) minimal or moderately impaired sensorimotor function
(Fugl-Meyer Motor Score 40 to 90,20 Orpington
Prognostic Scale score 2.0 to 5.221); (3)
ambulatory with supervision and/or assistive device; (4) living at
home; and (5) living within 50 miles of the University of Kansas
Medical Center.
Patients were evaluated by the therapist coordinator to
determine stroke severity and study eligibility. After eligibility for
this study was established and approval from the patient's primary
physician was obtained, subjects were contacted by the study therapist
to determine their willingness to participate. If subjects agreed to
participate, they came to the University of Kansas Medical Center's
Center on Aging Human Performance Laboratory for baseline
assessments. Follow-up testing for postintervention results was
performed 12 weeks after the baseline function assessment.
2 seconds'
difference between pretest and posttest; -1, decrease of >2 seconds
between pretest and posttest; and 1, increase of >2 seconds between
pretest and posttest). Ordinal scoring was used because some
individuals could not perform some of the items. We assigned times of
120 seconds for the "unable to do" items. These scores skewed the
data.
After baseline assessments, the subjects were randomly assigned
to the experimental or control group. Randomization was done in blocks
of 10. Before initiation of this study, a random list was generated by
group assignments. Only a laboratory technician who had no input into
subject selection or recruitment was aware of group assignment. After
baseline assessment, the technician assigned the subject to the
experimental or the control group.
The exercise program was designed to improve strength, balance,
and endurance and to encourage more use of the affected extremity. The
experimental group did not receive any physical or occupational therapy
other than that provided by the study. If an experimental group subject
required speech therapy, the subject was treated by usual care
providers. The experimental exercise intervention was initiated within
5 days of baseline testing. It was a home-based exercise program
provided by a physical therapist. The study principal investigator (a
physical therapist) and coinvestigator (an occupational therapist)
observed at least 1 therapy session for each subject to ensure standard
application of interventions. The program included 3 visits a week for
8 weeks, and the patients were instructed to continue the exercise
program on their own for 4 additional weeks. Each exercise session
lasted
1.5 hours. Exercise sessions were divided into 4 blocks
preceded by a 10-minute warm-up session of stretching and flexibility
exercise. The first block included assistive and resistive exercises
using Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation Patterns
(PNF)29 or Theraband exercise (see below) to the
major muscle groups of the upper and lower extremities. PNF exercises
include upper and lower extremity patterns. The movement patterns
included (1) flexion, abduction, and external rotation of shoulder with
the elbow extended and with wrist and finger extension; (2) extension,
adduction, and internal rotation of shoulder with elbow extended and
with finger and wrist flexion; (3) flexion, adduction, external
rotation of hips with knee flexion, and ankle dorsiflexion; and (4)
extension, abduction, internal rotation of hips with knee extension,
and ankle plantar flexion.
We used descriptive statistics to characterize demographics and
performance for each group. We compared differences in change
scores between groups using Wilcoxon rank sum
tests.30 The Cochran Mantzel-Haenszel
statistic31 was used to compare differences in
distributions of change scores for the Jebsen Test of Hand
Function.
![]()
Results
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Subjects and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
Study Subjects
Twenty individuals with stroke were studied. Of 22 subjects
recruited, 2 refused to participate. Table 1
characterizes the patients by
control and experimental groups. Baseline scores on all assessments are
presented in Table 2
.
View this table:
[in a new window]
Table 1. Subject Characteristics by Group
View this table:
[in a new window]
Table 2. Baseline and 12-Week Follow-Up Scores for Subjects
in Control and Experimental Groups
The therapy programs received by the control group were
variable in intensity, frequency, and duration. Six individuals
received home health visits, and 4 received outpatient therapy. Types
of exercises received by the usual care group were highly variable,
but no one received endurance training. Table 3
provides a description of therapies
received by the control group. All subjects in the control group
complied with monitoring of therapies and were retested at 3
months.
View this table:
[in a new window]
Table 3. Therapeutic Interventions for Control Group (n=0)
Each member of the experimental group received 23 visits by a
physical therapist for 90 minutes in duration. The experimental group
was treated for 8 weeks and instructed to continue exercise
interventions at home for an additional 4 weeks. All subjects completed
the intervention program and were retested. One experimental group
subject took 12 weeks to complete therapist-directed sessions. During
the course of the intervention period, he had 2 surgeries (carotid
endarterectomy and carpal tunnel release). Because
of the intervening surgeries and the need for continuation of therapy
for the upper extremity after carpal tunnel surgery, this patient
received 17 additional therapy sessions.
The experimental group demonstrated more improvement in upper and
lower extremity Fugl-Meyer scores than did the usual care group (Table 2
). However, the differences in motor recovery were only significant
for the lower extremity.
There were significant differences in changes in gait speed
between the experimental group and the control group (Table 2
). The
direction of differences in changes in balance scores and the 6-Minute
Walk favored the experimental group but was not significant (Table 2
).
Assessment of upper extremity functional performance by the
Jebsen Test of Hand Function revealed no trends in changes in speed of
upper extremity movements between the experimental and control groups
(Table 4
).
View this table:
[in a new window]
Table 4. Distribution of Changes in Time to Perform Jebsen
Test of Hand Function With Affected Upper Extremity
No group differences were found in the changes on the Barthel
Index ADL or the Lawton Instrumental ADL (Table 2
). Assessment of the 8
domains of the MOS-36 did not reveal any direction of effect except for
the Physical Function Scale. In the experimental group, the mean change
on the MOS-36 Physical Function Scale was 15.5±16.7, and the median
change was 22.5. For the control group, the mean change was 9±12.6,
and median change was 5.
![]()
Discussion
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Subjects and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
We demonstrated the feasibility of recruiting stroke survivors as
subjects for a randomized clinical trial. Our target recruitment of 20
subjects for this 1-year pilot project was attained. Forty-nine
percent of patients from the first 100 patients in the Kansas City
Stroke Study were eligible to participate. Only 2 of 22 recruited
subjects declined to participate. We provided transportation for
baseline and postintervention assessments; only 3 of the 20 patients
could have participated if transportation had not been provided.
Compliance with the exercise intervention and retesting was excellent.
All 20 subjects completed the study. We also learned that it is
feasible to obtain records of usual care interventions and
characterize rehabilitation services by types of exercises, intensity,
duration, and frequency.
The results of this study guided us as we planned a more
definitive trial. In the present trial, we modified our therapy
program to include a more aggressive cardiovascular
endurance component. The larger trial will provide more power to detect
a change in health status and to evaluate interactions. In the ongoing
trial, we will assess whether any gains are maintained beyond the
immediate intervention period. The cost-effectiveness of the
intervention will also be assessed in future studies.
![]()
Acknowledgments
This study was supported by the US Department of Veterans
Affairs, VA Rehabilitation Research and Development Service, Washington
DC (E94 to 852AP), and by intramural funds from the Center on Aging at
the University of Kansas Medical Center. The authors wish to thank the
following hospitals in the Kansas City Stroke Study for their ongoing
support: Baptist Medical Center, University of Kansas Medical Center,
Liberty Hospital, Research Medical Center, St Joseph Medical Center, St
Luke's Medical Center, Medical Center of Independence, Trinity
Lutheran Medical Center, Mid-America Rehabilitation, The Rehabilitation
Institute, and Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Centers of Kansas
City and of Leavenworth.
![]()
References
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Subjects and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
1.
Duncan PW, Samsa GP, Weinberger M, Goldstein L,
Bonito A, Witter D, Enarson C, Matchar D. Health status of individuals
with mild strokes. Stroke. 1997;28:740745.
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
G. Boysen, L.-H. Krarup, X. Zeng, A. Oskedra, J. Korv, G. Andersen, C. Gluud, A. Pedersen, M. Lindahl, L. Hansen, et al. ExStroke Pilot Trial of the effect of repeated instructions to improve physical activity after ischaemic stroke: a multinational randomised controlled clinical trial BMJ, July 22, 2009; 339(jul20_3): b2810 - b2810. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. Haworth, C. Young, and E. Thornton The effects of an 'exercise and education' programme on exercise self-efficacy and levels of independent activity in adults with acquired neurological pathologies: an exploratory, randomized study Clinical Rehabilitation, April 1, 2009; 23(4): 371 - 383. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. Dickstein Rehabilitation of Gait Speed After Stroke: A Critical Review of Intervention Approaches Neurorehabil Neural Repair, November 1, 2008; 22(6): 649 - 660. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. L Scheets, S. A Sahrmann, and B. J Norton Use of Movement System Diagnoses in the Management of Patients With Neuromuscular Conditions: A Multiple-Patient Case Report Physical Therapy, June 1, 2007; 87(6): 654 - 669. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. M. Blennerhassett, T. A. Matyas, and L. M. Carey Impaired Discrimination of Surface Friction Contributes to Pinch Grip Deficit After Stroke Neurorehabil Neural Repair, May 1, 2007; 21(3): 263 - 272. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G. Alon, A. F. Levitt, and P. A. McCarthy Functional Electrical Stimulation Enhancement of Upper Extremity Functional Recovery During Stroke Rehabilitation: A Pilot Study Neurorehabil Neural Repair, May 1, 2007; 21(3): 207 - 215. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. Plummer, A. L. Behrman, P. W. Duncan, P. Spigel, D. Saracino, J. Martin, E. Fox, M. Thigpen, and S. A. Kautz Effects of Stroke Severity and Training Duration on Locomotor Recovery After Stroke: A Pilot Study Neurorehabil Neural Repair, March 1, 2007; 21(2): 137 - 151. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Blanton, D. M Morris, M. G Prettyman, K. McCulloch, S. Redmond, K. E Light, and S. L Wolf Lessons Learned in Participant Recruitment and Retention: The EXCITE Trial Physical Therapy, November 1, 2006; 86(11): 1520 - 1533. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H Dawes, N Korpershoek, J Freebody, C Elsworth, N van Tintelen, D T Wade, H Izadi, and D H Jones A pilot randomised controlled trial of a home-based exercise programme aimed at improving endurance and function in adults with neuromuscular disorders J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry, August 1, 2006; 77(8): 959 - 962. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Y. Pang, J. J Eng, A. S Dawson, and S. Gylfadottir The use of aerobic exercise training in improving aerobic capacity in individuals with stroke: a meta-analysis Clinical Rehabilitation, February 1, 2006; 20(2): 97 - 111. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. J. Olney, J. Nymark, B. Brouwer, E. Culham, A. Day, J. Heard, M. Henderson, and K. Parvataneni A Randomized Controlled Trial of Supervised Versus Unsupervised Exercise Programs for Ambulatory Stroke Survivors Stroke, February 1, 2006; 37(2): 476 - 481. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. L. Richards, F. Malouin, G. Bravo, F. Dumas, and S. Wood-Dauphinee The Role of Technology in Task-Oriented Training in Persons with Subacute Stroke: A Randomized Controlled Trial Neurorehabil Neural Repair, December 1, 2004; 18(4): 199 - 211. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R P. Van Peppen, G Kwakkel, S Wood-Dauphinee, H J. Hendriks, P. J Van der Wees, and J Dekker The impact of physical therapy on functional outcomes after stroke: what's the evidence? Clinical Rehabilitation, August 1, 2004; 18(8): 833 - 862. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. M. Ouellette, N. K. LeBrasseur, J. F. Bean, E. Phillips, J. Stein, W. R. Frontera, and R. A. Fielding High-Intensity Resistance Training Improves Muscle Strength, Self-Reported Function, and Disability in Long-Term Stroke Survivors Stroke, June 1, 2004; 35(6): 1404 - 1409. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
N. F. Gordon, M. Gulanick, F. Costa, G. Fletcher, B. A. Franklin, E. J. Roth, and T. Shephard Physical Activity and Exercise Recommendations for Stroke Survivors: An American Heart Association Scientific Statement From the Council on Clinical Cardiology, Subcommittee on Exercise, Cardiac Rehabilitation, and Prevention; the Council on Cardiovascular Nursing; the Council on Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Metabolism; and the Stroke Council Stroke, May 1, 2004; 35(5): 1230 - 1240. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
N. F. Gordon, M. Gulanick, F. Costa, G. Fletcher, B. A. Franklin, E. J. Roth, and T. Shephard Physical Activity and Exercise Recommendations for Stroke Survivors: An American Heart Association Scientific Statement From the Council on Clinical Cardiology, Subcommittee on Exercise, Cardiac Rehabilitation, and Prevention; the Council on Cardiovascular Nursing; the Council on Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Metabolism; and the Stroke Council Circulation, April 27, 2004; 109(16): 2031 - 2041. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. S. Pohl, S. Perera, P. W. Duncan, R. Maletsky, R. Whitman, and S. Studenski Gains in Distance Walking in a 3-Month Follow-Up Poststroke: What Changes? Neurorehabil Neural Repair, March 1, 2004; 18(1): 30 - 36. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. G Canning, L. Ada, R. Adams, and N. J O'Dwyer Loss of strength contributes more to physical disability after stroke than loss of dexterity Clinical Rehabilitation, March 1, 2004; 18(3): 300 - 308. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. L Morris, K. J Dodd, and M. E Morris Outcomes of progressive resistance strength training following stroke: a systematic review Clinical Rehabilitation, January 1, 2004; 18(1): 27 - 39. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Barreca, S. L. Wolf, S. Fasoli, and R. Bohannon Treatment Interventions for the Paretic Upper Limb of Stroke Survivors: A Critical Review Neurorehabil Neural Repair, December 1, 2003; 17(4): 220 - 226. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. C Bassile, C. Dean, B. Boden-Albala, and R. Sacco Obstacle training programme for individuals post stroke: feasibility study Clinical Rehabilitation, February 1, 2003; 17(2): 130 - 136. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C Meek, A Pollock, J Potter, and P Langhorne A systematic review of exercise trials post stroke Clinical Rehabilitation, January 1, 2003; 17(1): 6 - 13. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H. E. Andersen, K. Eriksen, A. Brown, K. Schultz-Larsen, and B. H. Forchhammer Follow-up services for stroke survivors after hospital discharge-a randomized control study Clinical Rehabilitation, June 1, 2002; 16(6): 593 - 603. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. Green, A. Forster, and J. Young Reliability of gait speed measured by a timed walking test in patients one year after stroke Clinical Rehabilitation, March 1, 2002; 16(3): 306 - 314. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. J. Eng, K. S. Chu, A. S. Dawson, C.M. Kim, and K. E. Hepburn Functional Walk Tests in Individuals With Stroke: Relation to Perceived Exertion and Myocardial Exertion Stroke, March 1, 2002; 33(3): 756 - 761. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. M Steffen, T. A Hacker, and L. Mollinger Age- and Gender-Related Test Performance in Community-Dwelling Elderly People: Six-Minute Walk Test, Berg Balance Scale, Timed Up & Go Test, and Gait Speeds Physical Therapy, February 1, 2002; 82(2): 128 - 137. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. Jackson, L. Turner-Stokes, J. Culpan, A. Bateman, O. Scott, J. Powell, and R. Greenwood Can brain-injured patients participate in an aerobic exercise programme during early inpatient rehabilitation? Clinical Rehabilitation, May 1, 2001; 15(5): 535 - 544. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. M Dean, C. L. Richards, and F. Malouin Walking speed over 10 metres overestimates locomotor capacity after stroke Clinical Rehabilitation, April 1, 2001; 15(4): 415 - 421. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. H van der Lee, I. A. Snels, H. Beckerman, G. J Lankhorst, R. C Wagenaar, and L. M Bouter Exercise therapy for arm function in stroke patients: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials Clinical Rehabilitation, January 1, 2001; 15(1): 20 - 31. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. S Pohl, J. K Startzell, P. W Duncan, and D. Wallace Reliability of lower extremity isokinetic strength testing in adults with stroke Clinical Rehabilitation, June 1, 2000; 14(6): 601 - 607. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Stroke Home | Subscriptions | Archives | Feedback | Authors | Help | AHA Journals Home | Search Copyright © 1998 American Heart Association, Inc. All rights reserved. Unauthorized use prohibited. |