Objective: To identify evidence-based prognostic factors in the subacute phase after a stroke for future residence at six months to one year post stroke.
Design: Systematic literature search designed in accordance with the Cochrane Collaboration criteria with the following data sources: (1) MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Current Contents, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, PsycLIT and Sociological Abstracts. (2) Reference lists, personal archives and consultation of experts in the field. (3) Guidelines.
Methods: Inclusion criteria were: (1) cohort studies of patients with an ischaemic or haemorrhagic stroke; (2) inception cohort with assessment of prognostic factors within the first two weeks after stroke; (3) outcome measures for future residence; and (4) a follow-up of six months to one year. Internal, statistical and external validity of the studies were assessed using a checklist with 11 methodological criteria in accordance with the recommendations of the Cochrane Collaboration.
Results: From 1027 potentially relevant studies 10 studies involving a total of 3564 patients met the inclusion criteria. No prognostic factor was identified in at least two level A (i.e., a good level of scientific evidence according to the methodological score) studies, our standard for scientific proof. The following factors were found in at least one level A study: low initial ADL functioning, high age, cognitive disturbance, paresis of arm and leg, not alert as initial level of consciousness, old hemiplegia, homonymous hemianopia, visual extinction, constructional apraxia, no transfer to the stroke unit, nonlacunar stroke type, visuospatial construction problems, urinary incontinence and female gender.
Conclusions: At present there is insufficient evidence concerning possible predictors in the subacute stage of stroke to make an evidence-based prediction of the future residence. In the scientific research until now social factors and their contribution to the possibility of living independently have not been investigated, or at least less well. None of the studies in this review described a conceptual framework as basis for the choice of the examined prognostic factors.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Jørgensen HS, Nakayama H, Raaschou HO, Vive-Larsen J, Stoier M, Olsen TS et al. Outcome and time course of recovery in stroke. Part I: outcome. The Copenhagen Stroke Study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil1995; 76: 399–405.
2.
Pedersen PM, Jørgensen HS, Nakayama H, Raaschou HO, Olsen TS. Orientation in the acute and chronic stroke patient: impact on ADL and social activities. The Copenhagen Stroke Study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil1996; 77: 336–339.
3.
Pedersen PM, Jørgensen HS, Nakayama H, Raaschou HO, Olsen TS. The impact of aphasia on ADL and social activities after stroke: the Copenhagen Stroke Study. J Neurol Rehabil1996; 10: 91–96.
4.
Moher D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S, Olkin I, Rennie D, Stroup DF. Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the Quorom statement. Lancet Eprint1999; 99ART/4149: UR.
5.
Mulrow CD, Oxman AD. Cochrane Collaboration Handbook [updated September 1997]. In: The Cochrane Library. Oxford: Update Software, 1999.
6.
Anonymous. Treatment guidelines for patients with a stroke. Dutch Neurological Society. Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, 1996.
7.
Anonymous. Symposium recommendations for stroke guidelines of the Dutch Institute for Quality in Health Care CBO. Utrecht, 2000.
8.
Kwakkel G, Wagenaar RC, Kollen BJ, Lankhorst GJ. Predicting disability in stroke – a critical review of the literature. Age Ageing1996; 25: 479–489.
9.
Anonymous. Symposium recommendations for methodology in stroke outcome research. Task Force on Stroke Impairment, Task Force on Stroke Disability, and Task Force on Stroke Handicap. Stroke1990; 21(9 suppl): II68–II73.
10.
Kernan WN, Feinstein AR, Brass LM. A methodological appraisal of research on prognosis after transient ischemic attacks. Stroke1991; 22: 1108–1116.
11.
Sackett DL, Haynes RB, Guyatt GH, Tugwell P. Clinical epidemiology, a basic science for clinical medicine, second edition. Boston: Little, Brown & Co., 1991.
12.
Friedman PJ. Stroke outcome in elderly people living alone. Disabil Rehabil1995; 17: 90–93.
13.
Geerts MJP, Witte de LP, Visser-Meily JMA, Tilli DJP, Lindeman E, Bakx WGM. Daily functioning during the first year after stroke: living arrangements and use of rehabilitation and other care facilities after discharge from hospital. J Rehabil Sci1995; 8: 39–45.
14.
Jehkonen M, Ahonen J-P, Dastidar P et al. Predictors of discharge to home during the first year after right hemisphere stroke. Acta Neurol Scand2001; 104: 136–141.
15.
Jørgensen HS, Nakayama H, Raaschou HO, Pedersen PM, Houth J, Olsen TS. Functional and neurological outcome of stroke and the relation to stroke severity and type, stroke unit treatment, body temperature, age, and other risk factors: The Copenhagen Stroke Study. Top Stroke Rehabil2000; 6: 1–19.
16.
Sveen U, Wyller TB, Ljunggren AE, Bautz-Holter E. Predictive validity of early cognitive assessment in stroke rehabilitation. Scand J Occup Ther1996; 3: 20–27.
17.
Thommessen B, Bautz-Holter E, Laake K. Predictors of outcome of rehabilitation of elderly stroke patients in a geriatric ward. Clin Rehabil1999; 13: 123–128.
18.
Wyller TB, Sodring KM, Sveen U, Ljunggren AE, Bautz-Holter E. Are there gender differences in functional outcome after stroke?Clin Rehabil1997; 11: 171–179.
19.
Sveen U, Bautz-Holter E, Wyller TB, Ljunggren AE. Assessment of cognitive impairments after stroke: a methodological study. Scand J Occup Ther1994; 1: 85–93.
20.
Sødring KM, Bautz-Holter E, Ljunggren AE, Wyller TB. Description and validation of a test of motor function and activities. Scand J Rehabil Med1995; 27: 211–217.
21.
Jongbloed L. Problems of methodological heterogeneity in studies predicting disability after stroke. Stroke1990; 21(9 suppl): II32–II34.
22.
Barer DH, Mitchell JR. Predicting the outcome of acute stroke: do multivariate models help?Q J Med1989; 70: 27–39.
23.
Laupacis A, Wells G, Richardson WS, Tugwell P. Users' guides to the medical literature. V. How to use an article about prognosis. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA1994; 27: 234–237.
24.
Berkman LF, Leo LS, Horowitz R. Emotional support and survival following myocardial infarction: Findings from a prospective population based study of the elderly. Ann Intern Med1992; 117: 1003–1009.
25.
Kaplan GA, Salonen JT, Cohen RD, Brand RJ, Syme LS, Puska P. Social connections and mortality from all causes and cardiovascular disease: prospective evidence from eastern Finland. Am J Epidemiol1988; 128: 370–380.
26.
Kelly-Hayes M, Wolf PA, Kannel WB, Sytknowski P, D'Agostino RB, Gresham GE. Factors influencing survival and need for institutionalization following stroke: the Framingham study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil1988; 69: 415–418.
27.
Brosseau L, Potvin L, Philippe P, Boulanger Y. Post-stroke inpatient rehabilitation. II. Predicting discharge disposition. Am J Phys Med Rehabil1996; 75: 431–436.
28.
Colantonio A, Kasl SV, Ostfeld AM, Berkman LF. Psychosocial predictors of stroke outcomes in an elderly population. J Gerontol: Soc Sci1993; 48: 261–268.
