The purpose of this scoping review is to guide the effects of long-term application of CBRP in stroke patients and to help make recommendations for developing treatment protocols for therapeutic application. The study examined relevant literature published between 2009 and 2020 using searches of 4 scientific databases. CBRP may have long-term effects on the functional effectiveness of stroke patients. In particular, long-term effects on walking ability and level of daily living activities have been identified. However, disease-related health conditions and quality of life were less effective in the long run. The effect decreased over time, but the long-term effect was maintained. Long-term intervention after discharge has proven to make a significant difference in the outcome of the goal. Given the potential therapeutic benefits of this process, the results of this review highlight the lack of further research to establish the effectiveness of this form of community-based long-term rehabilitation therapy for stroke patients.
YoungMJRegenhardtRWLeslie-MazwiTMSteinMA.Disabling stroke in persons already with a disability: ethical dimensions and directives. Neurology. 2020;94(7):306-310.
2.
NorvangOPHokstadATaraldsenK, et al. Time spent lying, sitting, and upright during hospitalization after stroke: a prospective observation study. BMC Neurol. 2018;18(1):1-8.
3.
GohHStewartJC.Post-stroke fatigue is related to motor and cognitive performance: a secondary analysis. J Neurol Phys Ther. 2019;43(4):233-239.
4.
KohGCSaxenaSKNgTYongDFongN.Effect of duration, participation rate, and supervision during community rehabilitation on functional outcomes in the first poststroke year in Singapore. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2012;93(2):279-286.
5.
WilliamsEMartiniAJacksonHWaglandJTurner-StokesL.Time between acquired brain injury and admission to community-based rehabilitation: differences in cognitive and functional gains. Brain Inj. 2020;34(6):713-722.
6.
EnglishCHealyGNCoatesALewisLOldsTBernhardtJ.Sitting and activity time in people with stroke. Phys Ther. 2016;96(2):193-201.
7.
FiniNAHollandAEKeatingJSimekJBernhardtJ.How physically active are people following stroke? Systematic review and quantitative synthesis. Phys Ther. 2017;97(7):707-717.
8.
ZhouBZhangJZhaoY, et al. Caregiver-delivered stroke rehabilitation in rural China: the recover randomized controlled trial. Stroke. 2019;50(7):1825-1830.
9.
AltmanIMSwickSMalecJF.Effectiveness of home-and community-based rehabilitation in a large cohort of patients disabled by cerebrovascular accident: evidence of a dose-response relationship. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2013;94(9):1837-1841.
10.
BenvenutiFStuartMCappenaV, et al. Community-based exercise for upper limb paresis: a controlled trial with telerehabilitation. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2014;28(7):611-620.
11.
AroraMHarveyLAHayesAJ, et al. Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of telephone-based support versus usual care for treatment of pressure ulcers in people with spinal cord injury in low-income and middle-income countries: study protocol for a 12-week randomised controlled trial. BMJ Open. 2015;5(7):e008369.
12.
ArkseyHO’MalleyL.Scoping studies: Towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology2005;8(1):19-32
13.
DunnAMarsdenDLBarkerDVan VlietPSprattNJCallisterR.Cardiorespiratory fitness and walking endurance improvements after 12 months of an individualised home and community-based exercise programme for people after stroke. Brain Inj. 2017;31(12):1617-1624.
14.
EzeugwuVEMannsPJ.The feasibility and longitudinal effects of a home-based sedentary behavior change intervention after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2018;99(12):2540-2547.
15.
RoseDParisTCrewsE, et al. Feasibility and effectiveness of circuit training in acute stroke rehabilitation. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2011;25(2):140-148.
16.
AllenLRichardsonMMcIntyreA, et al. Community stroke rehabilitation teams: providing home-based stroke rehabilitation in Ontario, Canada. Can J Neurol Sci. 2014;41(6):697-703.
17.
AllenLMcIntyreAJanzenS, et al. Community stroke rehabilitation: how do rural residents fare compared with their urban counterparts?Can J Neurol Sci. 2016;43(1):98-104.
18.
LindleyRIAndersonCSBillotL, et al. Family-led rehabilitation after stroke in India (ATTEND): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2017;390(10094):588-599.
19.
GrimleyRSRosbergenICGustafssonL, et al. Dose and setting of rehabilitation received after stroke in Queensland, Australia: a prospective cohort study. Clin Rehabil. 2020;34(6):812-823.
20.
ShibutaHAbeTMiyamotoHHagiharaA.Interaction effects of in-hospital rehabilitation and the use of community-based services after hospital discharge on patients’ subsequent functional abilities. J Rehabil Med. 2016;48(3):307-315.
21.
PerinCBolisMLimontaM, et al. Differences in rehabilitation needs after stroke: a similarity analysis on the ICF core set for stroke. Int J Enviorn Res Public Health. 2020;17(12):4291.
22.
DallaquaGBBahiaMMMin LiLChunRYS. Stroke Communication Scale based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF-SCS). Disabil Rehabil. 2021;43(12):1722-1729.
23.
PanzeriAFerrarioSRVidottoG.Interventions for psychological health of stroke caregivers: a systematic review. Front Psychol. 2019;10:2045.
24.
LoveMFSharriefAChaoulASavitzSBeauchampJES. Mind-body interventions, psychological stressors, and quality of life in stroke survivors: a systematic review. Stroke. 2019;50(2):434-440.
25.
KimEParkY.The Effects of Community-Based Rehabilitation (CBR) on the elderly with Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI): a systematic review and meta analysis. J Korea Contents Assoc. 2019;19(7):628-637.
26.
KusuwoPMyezwaHPilusaSM’kumbuziV.A systematic review to identify system-related elements that can be used to evaluate community-based rehabilitation (CBR) programmes. Eur J Physiother. 2017;19(suppl 1):41-46.
27.
MulliganHWilkinsonAChenD, et al. Components of community rehabilitation programme for adults with chronic conditions: a systematic review. Int J Nurs Stud. 2019;97:114-129.
28.
WadeDT.What is rehabilitation? An empirical investigation leading to an evidence-based description. Clin Rehabil. 2020;34(5):571-583.
29.
MustafaogluRErhanBYeldanIGunduzBTarakciE.Does robot-assisted gait training improve mobility, activities of daily living and quality of life in stroke? A single-blinded, randomized controlled trial. Acta Neurol Belg. 2020;120(2):335-344.
30.
Grau-PellicerMChamarro-LusarAMedina-CasanovasJSerdà FerrerB.Walking speed as a predictor of community mobility and quality of life after stroke. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2019;26(5):349-358.
31.
AllenLJohn-BaptisteAMeyerM, et al. Assessing the impact of a home-based stroke rehabilitation programme: a cost-effectiveness study. Disabil Rehabil. 2019;41(17):2060-2065.
32.
FoleyMPHassonSMKendallE.Effects of a translational community-based multimodal exercise program on quality of life and the influence of start delay on physical function and quality of life in breast cancer survivors: a pilot study. Integr Cancer Ther. 2018;17(2):337-349.
33.
HeldJPFerrerBMainettiR, et al. Autonomous rehabilitation at stroke patients home for balance and gait: safety, usability and compliance of a virtual reality system. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2018;54(4):545-553.
34.
KoçA.Exercise in patients with subacute stroke: a randomized, controlled pilot study of home-based exercise in subacute stroke. Work. 2015;52(3):541-547.
