Can augmented physiotherapy input enhance recovery of mobility after stroke? A randomised controlled trial

I. Wellwood, T. Egerton, P. Langhorne, John David Norrie, GAPS Grp

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    40 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    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.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)529-537
    Number of pages8
    JournalClinical Rehabilitation
    Volume18
    Issue number5
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2004

    Keywords

    • INCREASED-INTENSITY
    • ARM FUNCTION

    Cite this

    Can augmented physiotherapy input enhance recovery of mobility after stroke? A randomised controlled trial. / Wellwood, I.; Egerton, T.; Langhorne, P.; Norrie, John David; GAPS Grp.

    In: Clinical Rehabilitation, Vol. 18, No. 5, 2004, p. 529-537.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Wellwood, I. ; Egerton, T. ; Langhorne, P. ; Norrie, John David ; GAPS Grp. / Can augmented physiotherapy input enhance recovery of mobility after stroke? A randomised controlled trial. In: Clinical Rehabilitation. 2004 ; Vol. 18, No. 5. pp. 529-537.
    @article{37415498d9a4416f919958945d83f242,
    title = "Can augmented physiotherapy input enhance recovery of mobility after stroke? A randomised controlled trial",
    abstract = "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.",
    keywords = "INCREASED-INTENSITY, ARM FUNCTION",
    author = "I. Wellwood and T. Egerton and P. Langhorne and Norrie, {John David} and {GAPS Grp}",
    year = "2004",
    doi = "10.1191/0269215504cr768oa",
    language = "English",
    volume = "18",
    pages = "529--537",
    journal = "Clinical Rehabilitation",
    issn = "0269-2155",
    publisher = "SAGE Publications Ltd",
    number = "5",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Can augmented physiotherapy input enhance recovery of mobility after stroke? A randomised controlled trial

    AU - Wellwood, I.

    AU - Egerton, T.

    AU - Langhorne, P.

    AU - Norrie, John David

    AU - GAPS Grp

    PY - 2004

    Y1 - 2004

    N2 - 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.

    AB - 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.

    KW - INCREASED-INTENSITY

    KW - ARM FUNCTION

    U2 - 10.1191/0269215504cr768oa

    DO - 10.1191/0269215504cr768oa

    M3 - Article

    VL - 18

    SP - 529

    EP - 537

    JO - Clinical Rehabilitation

    JF - Clinical Rehabilitation

    SN - 0269-2155

    IS - 5

    ER -