Effect of a comprehensive eRehabilitation intervention alongside conventional stroke rehabilitation on disability and health-related quality of life: A pre-post comparison

Berber Brouns, Leti van Bodegom-Vos, Arend J de Kloet, Sietske J Tamminga, Gerard Volker, Monique A M Berger, Marta Fiocco, Paulien H Goossens, Thea P M Vliet Vlieland, Jorit J L Meesters, Berber Brouns, Leti van Bodegom-Vos, Arend J de Kloet, Sietske J Tamminga, Gerard Volker, Monique A M Berger, Marta Fiocco, Paulien H Goossens, Thea P M Vliet Vlieland, Jorit J L Meesters

Abstract

Objective: To compare the effect on disability and quality of life, of conventional rehabilitation (control group) with individualized, tailored eRehabilitation intervention alongside conventional rehabilitation (Fast@home; intervention group), for people with stroke.

Methods: Pre-post design. The intervention comprised cognitive (Braingymmer®) and physical (Telerevalidatie®/Physitrack®) exercises, activity-tracking (Activ8®) and psycho-education. Assessments were made at admission (T0) and after 3 (T3) and 6 months (T6). The primary outcome concerned disability (Stroke Impact Scale; SIS). Secondary outcomes were: health-related quality of life, fatigue, self-management, participation and physical activity. Changes in scores between T0-T3, T3-T6, and T0-T6 were compared by analysis of variance and linear mixed models.

Results: The study included 153 and 165 people with stroke in the control and intervention groups, respectively. In the intervention group, 82 (50%) people received the intervention, of whom 54 (66%) used it. Between T3 and T6, the change in scores for the SIS subscales Communication (control group/intervention group -1.7/-0.3) and Physical strength (-5.7/3.3) were significantly greater in the total intervention group (all mean differences< minimally clinically important differences). No significant differences were found for other SIS subscales or secondary outcomes, or between T0-T3 and T0-T6.

Conclusion: eRehabilitation alongside conventional stroke rehabilitation had a small positive effect on communication and physical strength on the longer term, compared to conventional rehabilitation only.

Keywords: Stroke Impact Scale; comprehensive healthcare; eHealth; eRehabilitation; patient-reported outcome measures; rehabilitation; stroke; telerehabilitation.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
The Fast@home intervention.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Patient flow chart. eR: eRehabilitation.
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Use of Fast@home over time. Number of non-users (blue) and users (red) of Fast@home over time with measurement moments at T0 (start of rehabilitation), T3 (3 months after admissions) and T6 (6 months after admission).

References

    1. World Health Organization (WHO) . Cardiovascular diseases. (Accessed October, 2019). 2017. Available at: .
    1. Paker N, Bugdayci D, Tekdos D, Kaya B, Dere C. Impact of cognitive impairment on functional outcome in stroke. Stroke Res Treat 2010. 10.4061/2010/652612.
    1. Langhorne P, Bernhardt J, Kwakkel G. Stroke rehabilitation. Lancet 2011; 377: 1693–1702.
    1. Ottenbacher KJ, Jannell S. The results of clinical trials in stroke rehabilitation research. Arch Neurol 1993; 50: 37–44.
    1. National Stroke Guidelines . Richtlijn Herseninfact en hersenbloeding. (Accessed 2019 Aug). 2018. Available at: .
    1. Corbetta D, Imeri F, Gatti R. Rehabilitation that incorporates virtual reality is more effective than standard rehabilitation for improving walking speed, balance and mobility after stroke: a systematic review. J Physiother 2015; 61: 117–124.
    1. Johansson T, Wild C. Telerehabilitation in stroke care – a systematic review. J Telemed Telecare 2011; 17: 1–6.
    1. Sarfo FS, Ulasavets U, Opare-Sem OK, Ovbiagele B. Tele-rehabilitation after stroke: an updated systematic review of the literature. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis 2018; 27: 2306–2318.
    1. Laver KE, Adey-Wakeling Z, Crotty M, Lannin NA, George S, Sherrington C. Telerehabilitation services for stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2020; 1.
    1. Brouns B, Meesters JJL, Wentink MM, de Kloet AJ, Arwert HJ, Vliet Vlieland TPM, et al. . Why the uptake of eRehabilitation programs in stroke care is so difficult-a focus group study in the Netherlands. Implement Sci 2018; 13: 133-018-0827-5.
    1. van den Berg M, Crotty MP, Liu E, Killington M, Kwakkel GP, van Wegen E. Early supported discharge by caregivermediated exercises and e-health support after stroke: a proof-of-concept trial. Stroke 2016; 47: 1885–1892.
    1. Cramer SC, Dodakian L, Le V, See J, Augsburger R, McKenzie A, et al. . Efficacy of home-based telerehabilitation vs in-clinic therapy for adults after stroke: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Neurol 2019; 76: 1079–1087
    1. Chumbler NR, Li X, Quigley P, Morey MC, Rose D, Griffiths P, et al. . A randomized controlled trial on stroke telerehabilitation: the effects on falls self-efficacy and satisfaction with care. J Telemed Telecare 2015; 21: 139–143.
    1. Akbik F, Hirsch JA, Chandra RV, Frei D, Patel AB, Rabinov JD, et al. . Telestroke-the promise and the challenge. Part two – expansion and horizons. J Neurointerv Surg 2017; 9: 361–365.
    1. Schwamm, L. H., Chumbler, N., Brown, E., Fonarow, G.C., Berube D, Nystrom K, Lacktman N. Recommendations for the implementation of telehealth in cardiovascular and stroke care: a policy statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation 2017; 135: 24–44.
    1. Groeneveld IF, Goossens PH, van Meijeren-Pont W, Arwert HJ, Meesters JJL, Rambaran Mishre AD, et al. . Value-based stroke rehabilitation: feasibility and results of patientreported outcome measures in the first year after stroke. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis 2019; 28: 499–512.
    1. Pont W, Groeneveld I, Arwert H, Meesters J, Mishre RR, Vliet Vlieland T, et al. . Caregiver burden after stroke: changes over time? Disabil Rehabil 2020; 42: 360–367.
    1. Groeneveld IF, Goossens PH, van Braak I, van der Pas S, Meesters JJL, Rambaran Mishre RD, et al. . Patients’ outcome expectations and their fulfilment in multidisciplinary stroke rehabilitation. Ann Phys Rehabil Med 2019; 62: 21–27.
    1. Groeneveld IF, van der Pas SL, Meesters JJL, Schuurman JM, van Meijeren-Pont W, Jagersma E, et al. . Illness perceptions of stroke survivors: predictors and changes over time - A 1year follow-up study. J Psychosom Res 2019; 116: 54–61.
    1. von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gotzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP, et al. . The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Lancet 2007; 370: 1453–1457.
    1. Hoffmann TC, Glasziou PP, Boutron I, Milne R, Perera R, Moher D, et al. . Better reporting of interventions: template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide. BMJ 2014; 348: 1687.
    1. Limburg M, Tuut MK. CBO guideline ‘Stroke’ (revision) Dutch Institute for Healthcare Improvement. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 2000; 144: 1058–1062.
    1. Groeneveld IF, Meesters JJ, Arwert HJ, Roux-Otter N, Ribbers GM, van Bennekom CA, et al. . Practice variation in the structure of stroke rehabilitation in four rehabilitation centres in the Netherlands. J Rehabil Med 2016; 48: 287–292.
    1. Brouns B, Meesters JJL, Wentink MM, de Kloet AJ, Arwert HJ, Boyce L, et al. . Factors associated with willingness to use eRehabilitation after stroke: a cross-sectional study among patients, informal caregivers and healthcare professionals. J Rehabil Med 2019; 51: 665–674.
    1. Zigmond AS, Snaith RP. The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Acta Psychiatr Scand 1983; 67: 361–370.
    1. Guidetti S, Ytterberg C, Ekstam L, Johansson U, Eriksson G. Changes in the impact of stroke between 3 and 12 months post-stroke, assessed with the Stroke Impact Scale. J Rehabil Med 2014; 46: 963–968.
    1. Duncan PW, Wallace D, Lai SM, Johnson D, Embretson S, Laster LJ. The stroke impact scale version 2.0. Evaluation of reliability, validity, and sensitivity to change. Stroke 1999; 30: 2131–2140.
    1. Lamers LM, Stalmeier PF, McDonnell J, Krabbe PF, van Busschbach JJ. Measuring the quality of life in economic evaluations: the Dutch EQ-5D tariff. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 2005; 149: 1574–1578.
    1. Gandek B, Ware JE, Aaronson NK, Apolone G, Bjorner JB, Brazier JE, et al. . Cross-validation of item selection and scoring for the SF-12 Health Survey in nine countries: results from the IQOLA Project. International Quality of Life Assessment. J Clin Epidemiol 1998; 51: 1171–1178.
    1. Krupp LB, LaRocca NG, Muir-Nash J, Steinberg AD. The fatigue severity scale. Application to patients with multiple sclerosis and systemic lupus erythematosus. Arch Neurol 1989; 46: 1121–1123.
    1. Whitehead L. The measurement of fatigue in chronic illness: a systematic review of unidimensional and multidimensional fatigue measures. J Pain Symptom Manage 2009; 37: 107–128.
    1. Hibbard JH, Mahoney ER, Stockard J, Tusler M. Development and testing of a short form of the patient activation measure. Health Serv Res 2005; 40: 1918–1930.
    1. van der Zee CH, Priesterbach AR, van der Dussen L, Kap A, Schepers VP, Visser-Meily JM, et al. . Reproducibility of three self-report participation measures: the ICF Measure of Participation and Activities Screener, the Participation Scale, and the Utrecht Scale for Evaluation of Rehabilitation-Participation. J Rehabil Med 2010; 42: 752–757.
    1. Craig CL, Marshall AL, Sjostrom M, Bauman AE, Booth ML, Ainsworth BE, et al. . International physical activity questionnaire: 12-country reliability and validity. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2003; 35: 1381–1395.
    1. van de Port IG, Wevers L, Roelse H, van Kats L, Lindeman E, Kwakkel G. Cost-effectiveness of a structured progressive task-oriented circuit class training programme to enhance walking competency after stroke: the protocol of the FIT-Stroke trial. BMC Neurol 2009; 9: 43.
    1. Flowers HL, Skoretz SA, Silver FL, Rochon E, Fang J, Flamand-Roze C, et al. . Poststroke aphasia frequency, recovery, and outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2016; 97: 2188–2201.
    1. Yang SY, Lin CY, Lee YC, Chang JH. The Canadian occupational performance measure for patients with stroke: a systematic review. J Phys Ther Sci 2017; 29: 548–555.

Source: PubMed

스폰서 및 공동 작업자

건강 상태

약물 개입

3
구독하다