Objective: To discover if the provision of additional inpatient physiotherapy after stroke speeds the recovery of mobility.
Design: A multisite single-blind randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing the effects of augmented physiotherapy input with normal input on the recovery of mobility after stroke.
Setting: Three rehabilitation hospitals in North Glasgow, Scotland.
Subjects: Patients admitted to hospital with a clinical diagnosis of stroke, who were able to tolerate and benefit from mobility rehabilitation.
Intervention: We aimed to provide double the amount of physiotherapy to the augmented group.
Main measures: Primary outcomes were mobility milestones (ability to stand, step and walk), Rivermead Mobility Index (RMI) and walking speed.
Results: Seventy patients were recruited. The augmented therapy group received more direct contact with a physiotherapist (62 versus 35 minutes per weekday) and were more active (8.0% versus 4.8% time standing or walking) than normal therapy controls. The augmented group tended to achieve independent walking earlier (hazard ratio 1.48, 95% confidence interval 0.90–2.43; p=0.12) and had higher Rivermead Mobility Index scores at three months (mean difference 1.6; 0.1 to 3.3; p=0.068) but these differences did not reach statistical significance. There was no significant difference in any other outcome.
Conclusions: A modest augmented physiotherapy programme resulted in patients having more direct physiotherapy time and being more active. The inability to show statistically significant changes in outcome measures could indicate either that this intervention is ineffective or that our study could not detect modest changes.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
1 Beech R, Ratcliffe M, Tilling K, Wolfe C. Hospital services for stroke care: A European perspective. Stroke1996; 27: 1958–1964.
2.
2 Ashburn A, Partridge C, De Suza L. Physiotherapy and the rehabilitation of stroke: a review. Clin Rehabil1993; 7: 337–345.
3.
3 Ernst E. A review of stroke physiotherapy and physiotherapy. Stroke1990; 21: 108–115.
4.
4 Effective Health Care. Stroke rehabilitation. Leeds: Health Economics Evaluation Unit, 1992.
5.
5 Sackley C, Lincoln N. Physiotherapy treatment of stroke patients; a survey of current practice. Physiother Theory Pract1996; 12: 87–96.
6.
6 Pound P, Bury M, Gompertz P, Ebrahim S. Patients' satisfaction with stroke services. Clin Rehabil1994; 3: 7–17.
7.
7 Wellwood I, Dennis M, Warlow C. Patients' and carers' satisfaction with acute stroke management. Age Ageing1995; 24: 519–524.
8.
8 Langhorne P, Wagenaar R, Partridge C. Physiotherapy after stroke: more is better?Physiother Res Int1996; 1: 75–88.
9.
9 Kwakkel G, Wagennar R, Koelman T, Lankhorst G, Koetsier J. Effects of intensity of rehabilitation after stroke: a research synthesis. Stroke1997; 28: 1550–1556.
10.
10 Warlow C, Dennis M, van Gign J et al. Stroke: a practical guide to management, second edition. London: Blackwell Science, 2001.
11.
11 Lincoln N, Parry R, Vass C. Randomised, controlled trial to evaluate increased intensity of physiotherapy treatment of arm function after stroke. Stroke. 1999; 30: 573–579.
12.
12 Sunderland A, Tinson D, Bradley E et al. Enhanced physical therapy improves recovery of arm function after stroke. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry1992; 55: 530–553.
13.
13 Rodgers H, Mackintosh J, Price C et al. Does an early increased-intensity interdisciplinary upper limb therapy programme following acute Augmented physiotherapy post stroke 537 stroke improve outcome?Clin Rehabil2003; 17: 579–589.
14.
14 Partridge C, Mackenzie M, Edwards S et al.Is dosage of physiotherapy a critical factor in deciding patterns of recovery from stroke: a pragmatic randomized controlled trial. Physiother Res Int2000; 5: 230–240.
15.
15 Kwakkel G, Wagenaar R, Twisk J, Lankhorst G, Koetsier J. Intensity of arm and leg training after primary middle-cerebral-artery stroke: a randomised trial. Lancet1999; 354: 191–196.
16.
16 Wade D. Measurement in neurological rehabilitation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992.
17.
17 Davidson I, Waters K. Physiotherapists working with stroke patients: a national survey. Physiotherapy2000; 86: 69–80.
18.
18 Edwards S, Partridge C, Mei R. Treatment schedules for research. Physiotherapy1991; XX: 35–38.
19.
19 Partridge C, Johnston M, Edwards M. Recovery from physical disability after stroke: normal patterns as a basis for evaluation. Lancet1987; 1: 373–375.
20.
20 Smith M, Baer G. Achievement of simple mobility milestones after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil1999; 80: 442–447.
21.
21 Collen F, Wade D, Robb G, Bradshaw C. The Rivermead Mobility Index: a further development of the Rivermead Motor Assessment. Int Disabil Stud1991; 13: 50–54.
22.
22 Dorman P, Waddell F, Slattery J, Dennis M, Sandercock P. Is the EuroQol a valid measure of health related quality of life after stroke?Stroke1997; 28: 1876–1882.
