on November 4, 2004
Published online before print November 4, 2004, doi: 10.1161/01.STR.0000147724.83468.18
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Submitted on September 17, 2004
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. * To whom correspondence should be addressed. 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 57days). 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.
Accepted on September 21, 2004
Poststroke "Pushing". Natural History and Relationship to Motor and Functional Recovery
Cynthia J. Danells MSc;
Key words: physical therapy techniques • prognosis • rehabilitation
This article has been cited by other articles:
 |
|
 |
|
  S. R Babyar, M. G. Peterson, R. Bohannon, D. Perennou, and M. Reding Clinical examination tools for lateropulsion or pusher syndrome following stroke: a systematic review of the literature Clinical Rehabilitation, July 1, 2009; 23(7): 639 - 650. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 D. A. Perennou, G. Mazibrada, V. Chauvineau, R. Greenwood, J. Rothwell, M. A. Gresty, and A. M. Bronstein Lateropulsion, pushing and verticality perception in hemisphere stroke: a causal relationship? Brain, September 1, 2008; 131(9): 2401 - 2413. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. Baccini, M. Paci, L. Nannetti, C. Biricolti, and L. A Rinaldi Scale for Contraversive Pushing: Cutoff Scores for Diagnosing "Pusher Behavior" and Construct Validity Physical Therapy, August 1, 2008; 88(8): 947 - 955. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. R. Babyar, H. White, N. Shafi, and M. Reding Outcomes With Stroke and Lateropulsion: A Case-Matched Controlled Study Neurorehabil Neural Repair, July 1, 2008; 22(4): 415 - 423. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
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]
|
|