An investigation of the factors that influence functional improvement in stroke rehabilitation

Background/aim: The purpose of this study was to determine effect of age, sex, affected extremity, disability severity, treatment type, cerebrovascular accident (CVA) etiology, number of treatment sessions, and CVA duration on the functional improvement of the stroke patients who participated in a physical medicine and rehabilitation program. Materials and methods: The research sample consisted of 322 stroke patients. Clinical and demographic features including age, sex, affected extremity, disability severity, treatment type, CVA etiology, number of treatment sessions, and CVA duration were recorded. Functional status was evaluated retrospectively by using the functional independence measure (FIM) at admission and discharge. Results: It was detected that discharge FIM score of the patients exhibited an increase of significance level (p < 0.05). It was found that age, number of treatment sessions, CVA duration and FIM admission score were determinative parameters in FIM gain level (p < 0.05) while sex, affected extremity, and CVA etiology were not effective in FIM gain level (p > 0.05). Conclusion: Results show that functional improvement after rehabilitation was better in the younger ages, shorter CVA durations and moderate functional disturbances. The findings obtained may be useful for stroke rehabilitation triage.Key words: Recovery, cerebrovascular accident, outcomes

PDF

___

1. Force WT. Report of the WHO task force on stroke and other cerebrovascular disorders. Recommendations on stroke prevention, diagnosis and therapy. Stroke 1989; 20 (10): 1407- 1431. doi: 10.1161/01.str.20.10.1407
2. Feigin VL, Lawes CM, Bennett DA, Anderson CS. Stroke epidemiology: a review of population-based studies of incidence, prevalence, and case-fatality in the late 20th century. The Lancet Neurology 2003; 2 (1): 43-53. doi: 10.1016/s1474- 4422(03)00266-7
3. Langhorne P, Bernhardt J, Kwakkel G. Stroke rehabilitation. Lancet 2011; 377 (9778): 1693-1702. doi: 10.1016/S0140- 6736(11)60325-5
4. Olsen T. Improvement of function and motor impairment after stroke. Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair 1989; 3 (4): 187- 192. doi: 10.1177/136140968900300403
5. Carod-Artal FJ, Medeiros MSM, Horan TA, Braga LW. Predictive factors of functional gain in long-term stroke survivors admitted to a rehabilitation programme. Brain Injury 2005; 19 (9): 667-673. doi: 10.1080/02699050400013626
6. Inouye M, Hashimoto H, Mio T, Sumino K. Influence of admission functional status on functional change after stroke rehabilitation. American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation 2001; 80 (2): 121-125. doi: 10.1097/00002060- 200102000-00008
7. Macciocchi SN, Diamond PT, Alves WM, Mertz T. Ischemic stroke: relation of age, lesion location, and initial neurologic deficit to functional outcome. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 1998; 79 (10): 1255-1257. doi: 10.1016/ s0003-9993(98)90271-4
8. Kelly PJ, Furie KL, Shafqat S, Rallis N, Chang Y et al. Functional recovery following rehabilitation after hemorrhagic and ischemic stroke. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2003; 84 (7): 968-972. doi: 10.1016/s0003- 9993(03)00040-6
9. Ween JE, Alexander MP, D’Esposito M, Roberts M. Factors predictive of stroke outcome in a rehabilitation setting. Neurology 1996; 47 (2): 388-392. doi: 10.1212/wnl.47.2.388
10. Jørgensen HS, Reith J, Nakayama H, Kammersgaard LP, Raaschou HO et al. What determines good recovery in patients with the most severe strokes? The Copenhagen Stroke Study. Stroke 1999; 30 (10): 2008-2012. doi: 10.1161/01.str.30.10.2008
11. Eskiyurt N, Yalıman A, Vural M, Kızıltaş H, Bölükbaş N et al. Characteristics and functional outcomes of stroke patients. Journal of İstanbul Faculty of Medicine 2005; 68 (3): 71-77 (article in Turkish with an abstract in English).
12. Balcı B, Ertekin Ö, Kara B, Erdem Y. The effects of inpatient rehabilitation program in acute stroke patients. Journal of Neurological Sciences [Turkish] 2011; 28 (2): 142-154 (article in Turkish with an abstract in English).
13. Luk JKH, Cheung RTF, Ho SL, Li L. Does age predict outcome in stroke rehabilitation? A study of 878 Chinese subjects. Cerebrovascular Diseases 2006; 21 (4): 229-234. doi: 10.1159/000091219
14. Wade DT, Langton-Hewer R,Wood VA. Stroke: the influence of age upon outcome. Age and Ageing 1984; 13 (6): 357-362. doi: 10.1093/ageing/13.6.357
15. Luk JKH, Chiu PKC, Chu LW. Gender differences in rehabilitation outcomes among older Chinese patients. Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics 2011; 52 (1): 28-32. doi: 10.1016/j.archger.2010.01.016
16. Robinson-Smith G, Johnston MV, Allen J. Self-care selfefficacy, quality of life, and depression after stroke. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2000; 81 (4): 460-464. doi: 10.1053/mr.2000.3863
17. Küçükdeveci AA, Yavuzer G, Elhan AH, Sonel B, Tennant A. Adaptation of the functional independence measure for use in Turkey. Clinical Rehabilitation 2001; 15 (3): 311-319. doi: 10.1191/026921501676877265
18. Alexander MP. Stroke rehabilitation outcome. A potential use of predictive variables to establish levels of care. Stroke 1994; 25 (1): 128-134. doi: 10.1161/01.str.25.1.128
19. Lin JH, Hsiao SF, Chang CM, Huang MH, Liu CK et al. Factors influencing functional independenceoutcome in stroke patients after rehabilitation. Kaohsiung Journal of Medical Sciences 2000; 16 (7): 351-359.
20. Cakir T, Sarier RN, Dogan SK, Toraman NF. Factors affecting the Functional Independence Measure gain of patients with stroke. Turkish Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2015; 61 (1): 30-35. doi: 10.5152/tftrd.2015.78045
21. Nakipoğlu-Yüzer GF, Doğan-Aslan M, Doğan A, Özgirgin N. The effect of the stroke etiology on functional improvement in our geriatric hemiplegic patients. Journal of Stroke and Cerebrovascular Diseases 2010; 19 (3): 204-208. doi: 10.1016/j. jstrokecerebrovasdis.2009.04.008
22. Paolucci S, Antonucci G, Grasso MG, Morelli D, Troisi E et al. Early versus delayed inpatient stroke rehabilitation: a matched comparison conducted in Italy. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2000; 81 (6): 695-700. doi: 10.1016/s0003- 9993(00)90095-9
23. Yavuzer G, Küçükdeveci A, Arasil T, Elhan A. Rehabilitation of stroke patients: clinical profile and functional outcome. American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation 2001; 80 (4): 250-255. doi: 10.1097/00002060-200104000-00003
24. Granger CV, Hamilton BB, Fiedler RC. Discharge outcome after stroke rehabilitation. Stroke 1992; 23 (7): 978-982. doi: 10.1161/01.str.23.7.978
25. Desrosiers J, Bourbonnais D, Bravo G, Roy PM, Guay M. Performance of the unaffected upper extremity of elderly stroke patients. Stroke 1996; 27 (9): 1564-1570. doi: 10.1161/01. str.27.9.1564
26. Öz B, Koca B, Ölmez N, Memiş A. Factors associated with functional and cognitive improvement in patients with stroke after rehabilitation. Turkish Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2008; 54 (3): 84-89 (article in Turkish with an abstract in English).
27. Ring H, Feder M, Schwartz J, Samuels G. Functional measures of first-stroke rehabilitation inpatients: usefulness of the functional independence measure total score with a clinical rationale. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 1997; 78 (6): 630-635. doi: 10.1016/s0003-9993(97)90429-9
28. Gokkaya N, Aras M, Cardenas D, Kaya A. Stroke rehabilitation outcome: the Turkish experience. International Journal of Rehabilitation Research 2006; 29 (2): 105-111. doi:10.1097/01. mrr.0000191852.03317.2b