Journal Home
Search for

Volume 86, Issue 12, Supplement, Pages 101-114 (December 2005)


View previous. 15 of 18 View next.

Stroke Rehabilitation Patients, Practice, and Outcomes: Is Earlier and More Aggressive Therapy Better?

Susan D. Horn, PhDaCorresponding Author Informationemail address, Gerben DeJong, PhDcd, Randall J. Smout, MSa, Julie Gassaway, MS, RNa, Roberta James, MStata, Brendan Conroy, MDb

Abstract 

Horn SD, DeJong G, Smout RJ, Gassaway J, James R, Conroy B. Stroke rehabilitation patients, practice, and outcomes: is earlier and more aggressive therapy better?

Objective

To examine associations of patient characteristics, rehabilitation therapies, neurotropic medications, nutritional support, and timing of initiation of rehabilitation with functional outcomes and discharge destination for inpatient stroke rehabilitation patients.

Design

Prospective observational cohort study.

Setting

Five U.S. inpatient rehabilitation facilities.

Participants

Poststroke rehabilitation patients (N=830; age, >18y) with moderate or severe strokes, from the Post-Stroke Rehabilitation Outcomes Project database.

Interventions

Not applicable.

Main Outcome Measures

Discharge total, motor, and cognitive FIM scores and discharge destination.

Results

Controlling for patient differences, various activities and interventions were associated with better outcomes including earlier initiation of rehabilitation, more time spent per day in higher-level rehabilitation activities such as gait, upper-extremity control, and problem solving, use of newer psychiatric medications, and enteral feeding. Several findings part with conventional practice, such as starting gait training in the first 3 hours of physical therapy, even for low-level patients, was associated with better outcomes.

Conclusions

Specific therapy activities and interventions are associated with better outcomes. Earlier rehabilitation admission, higher-level activities early in the rehabilitation process, tube feeding, and newer medications are associated with better stroke rehabilitation outcomes.

a Institute for Clinical Outcomes Research, International Severity Information Systems Inc, Salt Lake City, UT

b Stroke Recovery Program, Washington, DC

c National Rehabilitation Hospital, Washington, DC

d Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Georgetown University, Washington, DC

Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests to Susan D. Horn, PhD, Institute for Clinical Outcomes Research, 699 E South Temple, Ste 100, Salt Lake City, UT 84102-1282

 Supported by the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (grant no. H133B990005) and the U.S. Army and Materiel Command (cooperative agreement award no. DAMD17-02-2-0032). The views, opinions, and/or findings contained in this article are those of the author(s) and should not be construed as an official Department of the Army position, policy, or decision unless so designated by other documentation.

No commercial party having a direct financial interest in the results of the research supporting this article has or will confer a benefit upon the author(s) or upon any organization with which the author(s) is/are associated.

PII: S0003-9993(05)01277-3

doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2005.09.016


View previous. 15 of 18 View next.