Search

Background: The aim of the International Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Alliance is to create a world where worldwide collaboration brings major breakthroughs for the millions of people living with stroke. A key pillar of this work is to define globally relevant criteria for centers that aspire to deliver excellent clinical rehabilitation and generate exceptional outcomes for patients., Objectives: This paper presents consensus work conducted with an international group of expert stroke recovery and rehabilitation researchers, clinicians, and people living with stroke to identify and define criteria and measurable indicators for Centers of Clinical Excellence (CoCE) in stroke recovery and rehabilitation. These were intentionally developed to be ambitious and internationally relevant, regardless of a country's development or income status, to drive global improvement in stroke services., Methods: Criteria and specific measurable indicators for CoCE were collaboratively developed by an international panel of stroke recovery and rehabilitation experts from 10 countries and consumer groups from 5 countries., Results: The criteria and associated indicators, ranked in order of importance, focused upon (i) optimal outcome, (ii) research culture, (iii) working collaboratively with people living with stroke, (iv) knowledge exchange, (v) leadership, (vi) education, and (vii) advocacy. Work is currently underway to user-test the criteria and indicators in 14 rehabilitation centers in 10 different countries., Conclusions: We anticipate that use of the criteria and indicators could support individual organizations to further develop their services and, more widely, provide a mechanism by which clinical excellence can be articulated and shared to generate global improvements in stroke care., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

​​​​​​Background Informal stroke caregivers in Malaysia play an important role in supporting stroke survivors following acute care. Nevertheless, there is a lack of available data to inform the sufficiency of help and resources available to address the needs of local stroke caregivers. This study aimed to determine the unmet needs in caregiving skills, support, emotions, and finances as well as the associated factors of stroke caregivers in Malaysia. Methodology This multicenter, cross-sectional study used a self-administered survey developed and validated for the Malaysian population. It was prepared in paper-based and web-based formats, and it was distributed via direct contact with the respondents, post, and email. Respondents were recruited from different sites in Malaysia. In this study, unmet needs were defined as "help that was needed more or was not provided to assist caregivers and address their specific needs." This article only presents the quantitative data of this study. Data were analyzed using descriptive analysis and logistic regression to determine factors associated with unmet needs. Results Almost all study respondents (91%) reported having unmet needs. Unmet needs ranged from 1 to 10, while the mean unmet needs was 5. The highest unmet need was related to financial support (72.5%), followed by support from professionals to address their own needs (59.2%), skills to care for stroke survivors, i.e., skills in caring for stroke survivors with their daily activities (57.9%), and skills in supporting stroke survivors to perform rehabilitation at home (53.1%). The lowest unmet need was related to support in transporting stroke survivors from place to place (45.3%). Additionally, this study did not identify an association between the reported unmet needs and gender, age, ethnicity, duration of caregiving, and site of participation. Conclusions This study reported a range of unmet needs perceived by stroke caregivers in Malaysia. Further research is warranted to understand the gaps in supporting local stroke caregivers to inform future post-stroke support and services in the country., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright © 2023, Mohd Zawawi et al.)

Objectives: Stroke survivors often have unmet physical, psychological and/or social concerns. Patient Concerns Inventories (PCIs) have been developed for other health conditions to address concerns. Our objective was to develop a PCI for stroke care., Methods: This was a development study, including Modified Delphi study design, with academic and healthcare professionals with stroke care expertise. In Stage 1, a draft Stroke PCI (Version 1a) was created through identifying patient-reported concerns post-stroke from three previous studies and through expert panel discussions using Nominal Group Technique. In Stage 2, Version 1a was sent to 92 academic and healthcare professionals with stroke care expertise. Participants ranked their top 20 Stroke PCI items in order of importance and provided feedback. Rankings were converted into scores, and, with the feedback, used to amend the Stroke PCI. Two further rounds of feedback followed until consensus was reached between participants. A final draft of the Stroke PCI was created., Results: In stage 1, 64 potential Stroke PCI items were generated. In Stage 2, 38 participants (41.3%) responded to the request to rank Stroke PCI items. The three highest ranked items were 'Risk of another stroke', 'Walking', 'Recovery'. After three rounds of feedback and amendments, the final draft of the Stroke PCI consisted of 53 items., Conclusions: A Stroke PCI has been developed using patient-reported concerns in previous studies and input from academic and healthcare professionals. Future work will involve gathering further feedback on the tool and exploring its acceptability and usability in a pilot study., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To evaluate different stroke early supported discharge (ESD) services in different geographical settings using cost-consequence analysis (CCA), which presents information about costs and outcomes in the form of a balance sheet. ESD is a multidisciplinary service intervention that facilitates discharge from hospital and includes delivery of stroke specialist rehabilitation at home., Materials and Methods: Data were collected from six purposively sampled services across the Midlands, East and North of England. All services, rural and urban, provided stroke rehabilitation to patients in their own homes. Cost data included direct and overhead costs of service provision and staff travel. Consequence data included service level adherence to an expert consensus regarding the specification of ESD service provision., Results: We observed that the most rural services had the highest service cost per patient. The main costs associated with running each ESD service were staff costs. In terms of the consequences, there was a positive association between service costs per patient and greater adherence to meeting the evidence-based ESD service specification agreed by an expert panel., Conclusions: This study found that rural services were associated with higher costs per patient, which in turn were associated with greater adherence to the expert consensus regarding ESD service specification. We suggest additional resources and costs are required in order for rural services to meet evidence-based criteria.Implications for rehabilitationThe main costs of an early supported discharge (ESD) service for stroke survivors were staff costs and these were positively associated with greater levels of rurality.Greater costs were associated with greater adherence to ESD core components, which has been previously found to enhance the effectiveness of ESD service provision.The cost-consequence analysis provides a descriptive summary for decision-makers about the costs of delivering ESD, suggesting additional resources and costs are required in order for rural services to meet evidence-based criteria.

Purpose: The context of implementation plays an important role in the delivery of optimal treatments in stroke recovery and rehabilitation. Considering that stroke systems of care vary widely across the globe, the goal of the present paper is to compare healthcare providers' priority of key areas in translating stroke research to clinical practice among High Income Countries, Upper Middle- and Lower Middle-Income Countries (HICs, UMICs, LMICs). We also aimed to compare perceptions regarding the key areas' feasibility of implementation, and formulate recommendations specific to each socioeconomic region., Methods: Data related to recommendations for knowledge translation in stroke, from a primary survey from the second Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Roundtable were segregated based on socioeconomic region. Frequency distribution was used to compare the key areas for practice change and examine the perceived feasibility of implementation of the same across HIC, UMIC and LMICs., Results: A total of 632 responses from healthcare providers across 28 countries were received. Interdisciplinary care and access to services were high priorities across the three groups. Transitions in Care and Intensity of Practice were high priority areas in HICs, whereas Clinical Practice Guidelines were a high priority in LMICs. Interventions specific to clinical discipline, screening and assessment were among the most feasible areas in HICs, whereas Intensity of practice and Clinical Practice Guidelines were perceived as most feasible to implement in LMICs., Conclusion: We have identified healthcare providers' priorities for addressing international practice change across socioeconomic regions. By focusing on the most feasible key areas, we can aid the channeling of appropriate resources to bridge the disparities in stroke outcomes across HICs, UMICs and LMICs.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONIt is pertinent to examine the differences in priorities of stroke rehabilitation professionals and the feasibility of implementing evidence-based practice across socioeconomic regions.There is an urgent necessity for the development of clinical practice guidelines for stroke rehabilitation in Low-Middle Income Countries, taking into consideration the cultural, economic and geographical constraints.In upper-middle income countries, encouraging family support and timely screening and assessment for aphasia, cognition and depression appear to be the low hanging fruits to enhance quality of life after stroke.Innovative ways to increase intensity of practice and channelling of resources to improve transitions in care may prove to be the most beneficial in advancing stroke rehabilitation in high income countries.

This study investigated the life transformation of children when a parent returned home from hospital after a stroke. The study explored children's experiences of taking on caring roles in partnership with their well parent and stroke survivors' perceptions of the young carer roles. The study aimed to identify unmet support needs in order to inform future service provision. Semi-structured interviews were conducted separately with stroke survivors ( n = 7) (age range 41-60 years, mean 50.6) and their young carers ( n = 11) (age range 11-20 years, mean 16). Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed and analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Three overarching themes were identified: the lives of young carers, impact of stroke, and insulating the family. All the children were providing some level of care. None were in receipt of any formal support. Children moved in and out of the caring role in the absence of an adult, to act as primary carer. Young carers valued the life skills they were gaining but reported gaps in their knowledge and understanding of stroke. The well parent and young carers worked together in a bi-directional partnership to ameliorate the impact of stroke on the family. The study concluded that age appropriate and stroke specific information for children of stroke survivors could enhance agency and optimise positive outcomes of caring.

Objective: Family members of stroke survivors are often not supported for their caring role, with many reporting adjustment difficulties. This paper describes the development and content of a group-based intervention for informal carers of stroke survivors., Method: The intervention is based on the theoretical foundation of the biopsychosocial model with the aim to understand and address the physical, psychological and social factors of caring for stroke survivors. Findings from a comprehensive literature review and a qualitative study with carers and stroke professionals were synthesized to guide the intervention development. The Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist was used as a framework to describe the intervention., Results: The intervention integrates cognitive-behavioural approaches via the identification of the biopsychosocial (physical, emotional, social) factors that can have an impact on the well-being of carers. It includes education on stroke-specific topics and advice on coping strategies. It consists of six structured two-hour group sessions facilitated in a community setting. It provides information and support on adjusting to the caring role in the first year post-stroke. Intervention materials were designed for addressing carers' specific needs using psychological techniques, such as problem-solving, goal setting and relaxation exercises., Conclusion: We have underlined the importance for describing and reporting the process of intervention development for complex interventions in the context of stroke rehabilitation. An intervention addressing the needs of informal stroke carers (Biopsychosocial Intervention for Stroke Carers; BISC) has been developed and described. BISC was further evaluated in a single-centre feasibility randomized controlled trial., Competing Interests: No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s)., (© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.)

Background: Psychoeducation can provide information and support to cope with the physical and emotional effects of a health condition. This scoping review aimed to identify the evidence regarding psychoeducational interventions for people after a Transient Ischemic Attack (TIA) and minor stroke., Methods: This review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews. Three electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO) were searched for articles on interventions related to psychoeducational support post-TIA and minor/mild stroke. Search retrieved 3722 articles. Three reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, full-texts, and extracted data for included studies. Study quality was assessed using the JADAD scale. TIDieR checklist was used to describe interventions., Results: Fifteen RCTs were included. Twelve studies were of high quality (JADAD score ≥2), two were of low quality. A total of 1500 participants were recruited across studies. Definition of TIA and minor stroke was unclear, leading to the exclusion of several studies. Various interventions were included, including education/psychoeducation (n = 4); exercise and lifestyle advice (n = 3); telephone-based education/counseling (n = 3); secondary prevention education (n = 1); motivational interviewing (n = 2); self-management (n = 2). Interventions were inconsistently described, with information missing about who delivered it and tailoring., Conclusions: Definitions of stroke severity are not adequately reported. There are a variety of interventions including education about a range of stroke-specific topics. Many interventions are not adequately described, thus making it difficult to determine if the aim was to provide information or support post-TIA/minor stroke. There is a need for an in-depth systematic review to develop a clear definition of psychoeducation.

Objective: To determine the feasibility of recruiting to and delivering a biopsychosocial intervention for carers of stroke survivors., Design: Feasibility randomised controlled study with nested qualitative interview study., Setting: The intervention was delivered in the community in either a group or one-to-one format., Subjects: Carers and stroke survivors within one year of stroke onset., Interventions: A carer targeted intervention delivered by a research psychologist in six structured two-hour sessions or usual care control. The intervention combined education about the biological, psychological and social effects of stroke with strategies and techniques focussing on adjustment to stroke and caregiving. Stroke survivors in both groups received baseline and follow-up assessment but no intervention., Main Outcome: Recruitment rate, study attrition, fidelity of intervention delivery, acceptability and sensitivity of outcome measures used (health related quality of life, anxiety and depression and carer burden six months after randomisation)., Results: Of the 257 carers approached, 41 consented. Six withdrew before randomisation. Eighteen participants were randomised to receive the intervention and 17 to usual care. Attendance at sessions was greater when treated one-to-one. Feedback interviews suggested that participants found the intervention acceptable and peer support particularly helpful in normalising their feelings. Thirty participants were assessed at follow-up with improvements from baseline on all health measures for both groups., Conclusions: Our results suggest that a biopsychosocial intervention was acceptable to carers and can be delivered in group and one-to-one formats. Timing of approach and mode of intervention delivery is critical and requires tailoring to the carers individual needs.

Background: Implementation of stroke early supported discharge (ESD) services has been recommended in many countries' clinical guidelines, based on clinical trial evidence. This is the first observational study to investigate the effectiveness of ESD service models operating in real-world conditions, at scale., Methods and Results: Using historical prospective data from the United Kingdom Sentinel Stroke National Audit Programme (January 1, 2016-December 31, 2016), measures of ESD effectiveness were "days to ESD" (number of days from hospital discharge to first ESD contact; n=6222), "rehabilitation intensity" (total number of treatment days/total days with ESD; n=5891), and stroke survivor outcome (modified Rankin scale at ESD discharge; n=6222). ESD service models (derived from Sentinel Stroke National Audit Programme postacute organizational audit data) were categorized with a 17-item score, reflecting adoption of ESD consensus core components (evidence-based criteria). Multilevel modeling analysis was undertaken as patients were clustered within ESD teams across the Midlands, East, and North of England (n=31). A variety of ESD service models had been adopted, as reflected by variability in the ESD consensus score. Controlling for patient characteristics and Sentinel Stroke National Audit Programme hospital score, a 1-unit increase in ESD consensus score was significantly associated with a more responsive ESD service (reduced odds of patient being seen after ≥1 day of 29% [95% CI, 1%-49%] and increased treatment intensity by 2% [95% CI, 0.3%-4%]). There was no association with stroke survivor outcome measured by the modified Rankin Scale., Conclusions: This study has shown that adopting defined core components of ESD is associated with providing a more responsive and intensive ESD service. This shows that adherence to evidence-based criteria is likely to result in a more effective ESD service as defined by process measures. Registration: URL: http://www.isrctn.com/; Unique identifier: ISRCTN15568163.

Moving research evidence to practice can take years, if not decades, which denies stroke patients and families from receiving the best care. We present the results of an international consensus process prioritizing what research evidence to implement into stroke rehabilitation practice to have maximal impact. An international 10-member Knowledge Translation Working Group collaborated over a six-month period via videoconferences and a two-day face-to-face meeting. The process was informed from surveys received from 112 consumers/family members and 502 health care providers in over 28 countries, as well as from an international advisory of 20 representatives from 13 countries. From this consensus process, five of the nine identified priorities relate to service delivery (interdisciplinary care, screening and assessment, clinical practice guidelines, intensity, family support) and are generally feasible to implement or improve upon today. Readily available website resources are identified to help health care providers harness the necessary means to implement existing knowledge and solutions to improve service delivery. The remaining four priorities relate to system issues (access to services, transitions in care) and resources (equipment/technology, staffing) and are acknowledged to be more difficult to implement. We recommend that health care providers, managers, and organizations determine whether the priorities we identified are gaps in their local practice, and if so, consider implementation solutions to address them to improve the quality of lives of people living with stroke.

Moving research evidence to practice can take years, if not decades, which denies stroke patients and families from receiving the best care. We present the results of an international consensus process prioritizing what research evidence to implement into stroke rehabilitation practice to have maximal impact. An international 10-member Knowledge Translation Working Group collaborated over a six-month period via videoconferences and a two-day face-to-face meeting. The process was informed from surveys received from 112 consumers/family members and 502 health care providers in over 28 countries, as well as from an international advisory of 20 representatives from 13 countries. From this consensus process, five of the nine identified priorities relate to service delivery (interdisciplinary care, screening and assessment, clinical practice guidelines, intensity, family support) and are generally feasible to implement or improve upon today. Readily available website resources are identified to help health care providers harness the necessary means to implement existing knowledge and solutions to improve service delivery. The remaining four priorities relate to system issues (access to services, transitions in care) and resources (equipment/technology, staffing) and are acknowledged to be more difficult to implement. We recommend that health care providers, managers, and organizations determine whether the priorities we identified are gaps in their local practice, and if so, consider implementation solutions to address them to improve the quality of lives of people living with stroke.

The Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Roundtable (SRRR) meetings bring together an international group of preclinical and clinical researchers along with statisticians, methodologists, funders and consumers, working to accelerate the development of effective treatments for stroke recovery and to support best-evidence uptake in rehabilitation practice. The first meeting (2016) focused on four recommendation areas: translation of preclinical evidence into human discovery trials; recovery biomarkers to provide knowledge of therapeutic targets and prognosis in human stroke; intervention development, monitoring, and reporting standards; and standardized measurement in motor recovery trials. The impact of SRRR is growing, with uptake of recommendations emerging, and funders exploring ways to incorporate research targets and recommendations. At our second meeting (SRRR2, 2018), we worked on new priority areas: (1) cognitive impairment, (2) standardizing metrics for measuring quality of movement, (3) improving development of recovery trials, and (4) moving evidence-based treatments into practice. To accelerate progress towards breakthrough treatments, formation of an International Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Alliance is our next step, where working groups will take recommendations and build partnerships needed to achieve our goals.

Background: Dopamine is a key modulator of striatal function and learning and might improve motor recovery after stroke. Previous small trials of dopamine agonists after stroke provide equivocal evidence of effectiveness on improving motor recovery. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of co-careldopa plus routine occupational and physical therapy during early rehabilitation after stroke., Methods: This double-blind, multicentre, randomised controlled trial of co-careldopa versus placebo in addition to routine NHS occupational and physical therapy was done at 51 UK NHS acute inpatient stroke rehabilitation services. We recruited patients with new or recurrent clinically diagnosed ischaemic or haemorrhagic (excluding subarachnoid haemorrhage) stroke 5-42 days before randomisation, who were unable to walk 10 m or more, had a score of less than 7 points on the Rivermead Mobility Index, were expected to need rehabilitation, and were able to access rehabilitation after discharge from hospital. Participants were assigned (1:1) using stratified random blocks to receive 6 weeks of oral co-careldopa or matched placebo in addition to routine NHS physiotherapy and occupational therapy. The initial two doses of co-careldopa were 62·5 mg (50 mg of levodopa and 12·5 mg of carbidopa) and the remaining doses were 125 mg (100 mg of levodopa and 25 mg of carbidopa). Participants were required to take a single oral tablet 45-60 min before physiotherapy or occupational therapy session. The primary outcome was ability to walk independently, defined as a Rivermead Mobility Index score of 7 or more, at 8 weeks. Primary and safety analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. The trial is registered on the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN99643613., Findings: Between May 30, 2011, and March 28, 2014, of 1574 patients found eligible, 593 (mean age 68·5 years) were randomly assigned to either the co-careldopa group (n=308) or to the placebo group (n=285), on an average 18 days after stroke onset. Primary outcome data were available for all 593 patients. We found no evidence that the ability to walk independently improved with co-careldopa (125 [41%] of 308 patients) compared with placebo (127 [45%] of 285 patients; odds ratio 0·78 [95% CI 0·53-1·15]) at 8 weeks. Mortality at 12 months did not differ between the two groups (22 [7%] vs 17 [6%]). Serious adverse events were largely similar between groups. Vomiting during therapy sessions, after taking the study drug, was the most frequent adverse event and was more frequent in the co-careldopa group than the placebo group (19 [6·2%] vs 9 [3·2%])., Interpretation: Co-careldopa in addition to routine occupational and physical therapy does not seem to improve walking after stroke. Further research might identify subgroups of patients with stroke who could benefit from dopaminergic therapy at different doses or times after stroke with more intensive motor therapy., Funding: Medical Research Council., (Copyright © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Housing adaptations have been identified as an important environmental and prevention intervention for older adults, which may improve health and quality of life. The onset of disability in bathing can act as a warning for further disability in other activities and may therefore be a judicious time-point for intervention. The aim of this study was to determine the feasibility of conducting a Randomised Controlled Trial (RCT) of bathing adaptations, to evaluate whether they improve older adults' perceived health status and quality of life, prevent further functional deterioration, and reduce the use of other health and social care resources. This study was conducted in preparation for a powered RCT., Method: Eligibility criteria were aged > 65 and referred to local authority housing adaptations service for an accessible flush-floor shower. Participants were randomised to either usual adaptations (3-4 month wait) or immediate adaptations (no wait). Outcomes were assessed at 3, 6 and 9 months and included perceived physical and mental health status, health and social care related quality of life, independence in activities of daily living (ADL) and bathing, and falls. Data on costs and the use of health and social care resources were collected during follow-up in order to inform a definitive health economic evaluation., Results: Sixty participants were recruited and randomised, 31 to immediate adaptations and 29 to waiting list control. Mean age was 77(SD8), 58% women and 58% living alone. Follow-ups were completed with 90, 85 and 72% at 3, 6 and 9 months respectively. Adaptations were delivered to 65% of participants within the requisite timescales as there were delays with some privately owned properties. There were improvements from baseline in both groups on all outcome measures following the completion of the adaptations., Conclusions: This is the first RCT of housing adaptations in the UK. We demonstrated the feasibility of using a waiting list control, subject to minor alterations to the timescales for privately owned properties. A powered trial would evaluate the impact on older adults' quality of life and investigate the impact of waiting times on functional outcomes and health and care resource use., Trial Registration: ISRCTN14876332 Registered 12 July 2016.

Introduction: Reducing length of hospital stay for stroke survivors often creates a shift in the responsibility of care towards informal carers. Adjustment to the caregiving process is experienced by many carers as overwhelming, complex and demanding and can have a detrimental impact on mental and physical health and well-being. National policy guidelines recommend that carers' needs are considered and addressed; despite this, few interventions have been developed and empirically evaluated. We developed a biopsychosocial intervention in collaboration with carers of stroke survivors. Our aim is to determine whether the intervention can be delivered in a group setting and evaluated using a randomised controlled trial (RCT)., Methods and Analysis: Feasibility RCT and nested qualitative interview study. We aim to recruit up to 40 stroke carers within 1 year of the stroke onset. Carers are randomised to usual care or usual care plus biopsychosocial intervention. Each intervention group will consist of five stroke carers. The intervention will focus on: psychoeducation, psychological adjustment to stroke, strategies for reducing unwanted negative thoughts and emotions and problem-solving strategies. The main outcome is the feasibility of conducting an RCT. Carer outcomes at 6 months include: anxiety and depression, quality of life and carer strain. Data are also collected from stroke survivors at baseline and 6 months including: level of disability, anxiety and depression, and quality of life., Ethics and Dissemination: Favourable ethical opinion was provided by East Midlands - Nottingham2 Research Ethics Committee (14/EMI/1264). This study will determine whether delivery of the biopsychosocial intervention is feasible and acceptable to stroke carers within a group format. It will also determine whether it is feasible to evaluate the effects of the biopsychosocial intervention in an RCT. We will disseminate our findings through peer-reviewed publications and presentations at national and international conferences., Trial Registration Number: ISRCTN15643456; Pre-results., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.)

Recent reviews have demonstrated that the quality of stroke rehabilitation research has continued to improve over the last four decades but despite this progress, there are still many barriers in moving the field forward. Rigorous development, monitoring and complete reporting of interventions in stroke trials are essential in providing rehabilitation evidence that is robust, meaningful and implementable. An international partnership of stroke rehabilitation experts committed to develop consensus-based core recommendations with a remit of addressing the issues identified as limiting stroke rehabilitation research in the areas of developing, monitoring and reporting stroke rehabilitation interventions. Work exploring each of the three areas took place via multiple teleconferences and a two-day meeting in Philadelphia in May 2016. A total of 15 recommendations were made. To validate the need for the recommendations, the group reviewed all stroke rehabilitation trials published in 2015 (n=182 papers). Our review highlighted that the majority of publications did not clearly describe how interventions were developed or monitored during the trial. In particular, under-reporting of the theoretical rationale for the intervention and the components of the intervention call into question many interventions that have been evaluated for efficacy. More trials were found to have addressed the reporting of interventions recommendations than those related to development or monitoring. Nonetheless, the majority of reporting recommendations were still not adequately described. To progress the field of stroke rehabilitation research and to ensure stroke patients receive optimal evidence-based clinical care, we urge the research community to endorse and adopt our recommendations.

Recent reviews have demonstrated that the quality of stroke rehabilitation research has continued to improve over the last four decades but despite this progress, there are still many barriers in moving the field forward. Rigorous development, monitoring and complete reporting of interventions in stroke trials are essential in providing rehabilitation evidence that is robust, meaningful and implementable. An international partnership of stroke rehabilitation experts committed to develop consensus-based core recommendations with a remit of addressing the issues identified as limiting stroke rehabilitation research in the areas of developing, monitoring and reporting stroke rehabilitation interventions. Work exploring each of the three areas took place via multiple teleconferences and a two-day meeting in Philadelphia in May 2016. A total of 15 recommendations were made. To validate the need for the recommendations, the group reviewed all stroke rehabilitation trials published in 2015 (n = 182 papers). Our review highlighted that the majority of publications did not clearly describe how interventions were developed or monitored during the trial. In particular, under-reporting of the theoretical rationale for the intervention and the components of the intervention call into question many interventions that have been evaluated for efficacy. More trials were found to have addressed the reporting of interventions recommendations than those related to development or monitoring. Nonetheless, the majority of reporting recommendations were still not adequately described. To progress the field of stroke rehabilitation research and to ensure stroke patients receive optimal evidence-based clinical care, we urge the research community to endorse and adopt our recommendations.

Introduction: The Care Act 2014 has placed a responsibility on local authorities in England to provide services that prevent deterioration and minimise the use of other health and social care services. Housing adaptations have been identified as 1 of the 10 most promising prevention services for older adults, with bathing adaptations being the most requested. However, many local authorities have lengthy waiting times which may increase costs, reduce effectiveness and reduce the preventive effect. There is no robust evidence of the effect of these adaptations on: health, well-being and functional ability., Methods and Analysis: This is a feasibility randomised controlled trial (RCT) with nested qualitative interview study. The RCT will recruit between 40 and 60 people who have been referred for an accessible showering facility, and their carers, from 1 local authority in England. They will be randomised to either usual adaptations (∼3-month wait) or immediate adaptations (no wait). The primary outcome is the feasibility of conducting a powered study. The outcomes assessed will be: health and social care-related quality of life, independence in activities of daily living and bathing, falls and use of health and social care services. Outcomes will be assessed at 3 and 6 months. Preliminary health economic feasibility will be established., Ethics and Dissemination: Favourable ethical opinion was provided by the Social Care Research Ethics Committee (reference number 16/IEC08/0017). The results of this study will lay the foundations for a further powered study. This would investigate the effect of bathing adaptations on quality of life and whether increased waiting times are associated with poorer outcomes and increased costs. The results have further potential to inform trials of other housing or social care interventions using the novel waiting list control method. Dissemination will include peer-reviewed publications and presentations at national and international conferences., Trial Registration Number: ISRCTN14876332; Pre-results., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: None declared., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.)

Background: Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) mobilises endogenous haematopoietic stem cells and enhances recovery in experimental stroke. Recovery may also be dependent on an enriched environment and physical activity. G-CSF may have the potential to enhance recovery when used in combination with physiotherapy, in patients with disability late after stroke., Methods: A pilot 2 x 2 factorial randomised (1:1) placebo-controlled trial of G-CSF (double-blind), and/or a 6 week course of physiotherapy, in 60 participants with disability (mRS >1), at least 3 months after stroke. Primary outcome was feasibility, acceptability and tolerability. Secondary outcomes included death, dependency, motor function and quality of life measured 90 and 365 days after enrolment., Results: Recruitment to the trial was feasible and acceptable; of 118 screened patients, 92 were eligible and 32 declined to participate. 60 patients were recruited between November 2011 and July 2013. All participants received some allocated treatment. Although 29 out of 30 participants received all 5 G-CSF/placebo injections, only 7 of 30 participants received all 18 therapy sessions. G-CSF was well tolerated but associated with a tendency to more adverse events than placebo (16 vs 10 patients, p = 0.12) and serious adverse events (SAE) (9 vs 3, p = 0.10). On average, patients received 14 (out of 18 planned) therapy sessions, interquartile range [12, 17]. Only a minority (23%) of participants completed all physiotherapy sessions, a large proportion of sessions (114 of 540, 21%) were cancelled due to patient (94, 17%) and therapist factors (20, 4%). No significant differences in functional outcomes were detected in either the G-CSF or physiotherapy group at day 90 or 365., Conclusions: Delivery of G-CSF is feasible in chronic stroke. However, the study failed to demonstrate feasibility for delivering additional physiotherapy sessions late after stroke therefore a definitive study using this trial design is not supported. Future work should occur earlier after stroke, alongside on-going clinical rehabilitation., Trial Registration: ISRCTN.com ISRCTN16714730., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Objectives: The objective of this study was to test the feasibility of conducting a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of an intervention targeted at activities of daily living (ADL), delivered by an occupational therapist, in homecare reablement., Design: Feasibility parallel group RCT., Setting: Single-site local authority homecare reablement service., Participants: People referred for homecare reablement with ability to consent. Exclusion criteria were as follows: inability to speak English, receiving other community therapy services, needing two or more to assist transfer and receiving end-of-life care., Control: 'Usual care' was 6 weeks of homecare reablement delivered by social care workers (no routine health professional input)., Intervention: A targeted ADL programme, delivered by an occupational therapist incorporating goal setting, teaching/practising techniques, equipment/adaptations and provision of advice/support. This was in addition to usual care., Outcome Measures: Aspects of feasibility including eligibility, recruitment, intervention delivery, attrition and suitability and sensitivity of outcome measures. Participant outcomes were personal and extended ADL, quality of life, falls and use of health and social care services., Results: 30 participants were recruited, 15 to each arm, which was 60% of those eligible. Data from 22 (73%) were analysed at 6 months. Of the 15 participants, 13 (86%) received the intervention and were able to set one or more ADL goals. There were improvements from baseline in both groups, although overall improvements were greater in the occupational therapy (OT) intervention group. The biggest threat to feasibility was a change in service configuration during the trial, involving additional occupational therapy input, affecting usual care and recruitment., Conclusions: Despite the service reconfiguration, it was feasible to recruit and retain participants, deliver the intervention and collect outcome data that were responsive to change. The choice of primary outcome measure remains unclear. A further powered study is feasible and warranted; however, the design will require careful consideration because of ongoing national changes in service configurations., Trial Registration Number: ISRCTN21710246; Results., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/)

Background: Cochrane reviews of physiotherapy (PT) and occupational therapy (OT) for Parkinson's disease found insufficient evidence of effectiveness, but previous trials were methodologically flawed with small sample size and short-term follow-up., Objectives: To evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of individualised PT and OT in Parkinson's disease., Design: Large pragmatic randomised controlled trial., Setting: Thirty-eight neurology and geriatric medicine outpatient clinics in the UK., Participants: Seven hundred and sixty-two patients with mild to moderate Parkinson's disease reporting limitations in activities of daily living (ADL)., Intervention: Patients were randomised online to either both PT and OT NHS services (n = 381) or no therapy (n = 381). Therapy incorporated a patient-centred approach with individual assessment and goal setting., Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome was instrumental ADL measured by the patient-completed Nottingham Extended Activities of Daily Living (NEADL) scale at 3 months after randomisation. Secondary outcomes were health-related quality of life [Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire-39 (PDQ-39); European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D)], adverse events, resource use and carer quality of life (Short Form questionnaire-12 items). Outcomes were assessed before randomisation and at 3, 9 and 15 months after randomisation., Results: Data from 92% of the participants in each group were available at the primary time point of 3 months, but there was no difference in NEADL total score [difference 0.5 points, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.7 to 1.7; p = 0.4] or PDQ-39 summary index (0.007 points, 95% CI -1.5 to 1.5; p = 1.0) between groups. The EQ-5D quotient was of borderline significance in favour of therapy (-0.03, 95% CI -0.07 to -0.002; p = 0.04). Contact time with therapists was for a median of four visits of 58 minutes each over 8 weeks (mean dose 232 minutes). Repeated measures analysis including all time points showed no difference in NEADL total score, but PDQ-39 summary index (curves diverging at 1.6 points per annum, 95% CI 0.47 to 2.62; p = 0.005) and EQ-5D quotient (0.02, 95% CI 0.00007 to 0.03; p = 0.04) showed significant but small differences in favour of the therapy arm. Cost-effective analysis showed that therapy was associated with a slight but not significant gain in quality-adjusted life-years (0.027, 95% CI -0.010 to 0.065) at a small incremental cost (£164, 95% CI -£141 to £468), resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of under £4000 (£3493, 95% -£169,371 to £176,358). There was no difference in adverse events or serious adverse events., Conclusions: NHS PT and OT did not produce immediate or long-term clinically meaningful improvements in ADL or quality of life in patients with mild to moderate Parkinson's disease. This evidence does not support the use of low-dose, patient-centred, goal-directed PT and OT in patients in the early stages of Parkinson's disease. Future research should include the development and testing of more structured and intensive PT and OT programmes in patients with all stages of Parkinson's disease., Trial Registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN17452402., Funding: This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 20, No. 63. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. The Birmingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Birmingham, received support from the UK Department of Health up to March 2012. Catherine Sackley was supported by a NIHR senior investigator award, Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care East of England and West Midlands Strategic Health Authority Clinical Academic Training award.

Importance: It is unclear whether physiotherapy and occupational therapy are clinically effective and cost-effective in Parkinson disease (PD)., Objective: To perform a large pragmatic randomized clinical trial to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of individualized physiotherapy and occupational therapy in PD., Design, Setting, and Participants: The PD REHAB Trial was a multicenter, open-label, parallel group, controlled efficacy trial. A total of 762 patients with mild to moderate PD were recruited from 38 sites across the United Kingdom. Recruitment took place between October 2009 and June 2012, with 15 months of follow-up., Interventions: Participants with limitations in activities of daily living (ADL) were randomized to physiotherapy and occupational therapy or no therapy., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the Nottingham Extended Activities of Daily Living (NEADL) Scale score at 3 months after randomization. Secondary outcomes were health-related quality of life (assessed by Parkinson Disease Questionnaire-39 and EuroQol-5D); adverse events; and caregiver quality of life. Outcomes were assessed before trial entry and then 3, 9, and 15 months after randomization., Results: Of the 762 patients included in the study (mean [SD] age, 70 [9.1] years), 381 received physiotherapy and occupational therapy and 381 received no therapy. At 3 months, there was no difference between groups in NEADL total score (difference, 0.5 points; 95% CI, -0.7 to 1.7; P = .41) or Parkinson Disease Questionnaire-39 summary index (0.007 points; 95% CI, -1.5 to 1.5; P = .99). The EuroQol-5D quotient was of borderline significance in favor of therapy (-0.03; 95% CI, -0.07 to -0.002; P = .04). The median therapist contact time was 4 visits of 58 minutes over 8 weeks. Repeated-measures analysis showed no difference in NEADL total score, but Parkinson Disease Questionnaire-39 summary index (diverging 1.6 points per annum; 95% CI, 0.47 to 2.62; P = .005) and EuroQol-5D score (0.02; 95% CI, 0.00007 to 0.03; P = .04) showed small differences in favor of therapy. There was no difference in adverse events., Conclusions and Relevance: Physiotherapy and occupational therapy were not associated with immediate or medium-term clinically meaningful improvements in ADL or quality of life in mild to moderate PD. This evidence does not support the use of low-dose, patient-centered, goal-directed physiotherapy and occupational therapy in patients in the early stages of PD. Future research should explore the development and testing of more structured and intensive physical and occupational therapy programs in patients with all stages of PD., Trial Registration: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN17452402.

Objective: Randomised controlled trials have shown the benefits of Early Supported Discharge (ESD) of stroke survivors. Our aim was to evaluate whether ESD is still beneficial when operating in the complex context of frontline healthcare provision., Design: We conducted a cohort study with quasi experimental design. A total of 293 stroke survivors (transfer independently or with assistance of one, identified rehabilitation goals) within two naturally formed groups were recruited from two acute stroke units: 'ESD' n=135 and 'Non ESD' n=158 and 84 caregivers. The 'ESD' group accessed either of two ESD services operating in Nottinghamshire, UK. The 'Non ESD' group experienced standard practices for discharge and onward referral. Outcome measures (primary: Barthel Index) were administered at baseline, 6 weeks, 6 months and 12 months., Results: The ESD group had a significantly shorter length of hospital stay (P=0.029) and reported significantly higher levels of satisfaction with services received (P<0.001). Following adjustment for age differences at baseline, participants in the ESD group (n=71) had significantly higher odds (compared to the Non ESD group, n=85) of being in the ⩾90 Barthel Index category at 6 weeks (OR = 1.557, 95% CI 2.579 to 8.733), 6 months (OR = 1.541, 95% CI 2.617 to 8.340) and 12 months (OR 0.837, 95% CI 1.306 to 4.087) respectively in relation to baseline. Carers of patients accessing ESD services showed significant improvement in mental health scores (P<0.01)., Conclusion: The health benefits of ESD are still evident when evidence based models of these services are implemented in practice., (© The Author(s) 2015.)

Background: Care home residents with stroke-related disabilities have significant activity limitations. Phase II trial results suggested a potential benefit of occupational therapy (OT) in maintaining residents' capacity to engage in functional activity., Objective: To evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a targeted course of OT in maintaining functional activity and reducing further health risks from inactivity for UK care home residents living with stroke-related disabilities., Design: Pragmatic, parallel-group, cluster randomised controlled trial with economic evaluation. Cluster randomisation occurred at the care-home level. Homes were stratified according to trial administrative centre and type of care provided (nursing or residential), and they were randomised 1 : 1 to either the intervention or the control arm., Setting: The setting was 228 care homes which were local to 11 trial administrative centres across England and Wales., Participants: Care home residents with a history of stroke or transient ischaemic attack, including residents with communication and cognitive impairments, not receiving end-of-life care., Intervention: Personalised 3-month course of OT delivered by qualified therapists. Care workers participated in training workshops to support personal activities of daily living. The control condition consisted of usual care for residents., Main Outcome Measures: Outcome data were collected by a blinded assessor. The primary outcome at the participant level was the Barthel Index of Activities of Daily Living (BI) score at 3 months. The secondary outcomes included BI scores at 6 and 12 months post randomisation, and the Rivermead Mobility Index, Geriatric Depression Scale-15 and European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions, three levels, questionnaire scores at all time points. Economic evaluation examined the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gain. Costs were estimated from the perspective of the NHS and Personal Social Services., Results: Overall, 568 residents from 114 care homes were allocated to the intervention arm and 474 residents from another 114 care homes were allocated to the control arm, giving a total of 1042 participants. Randomisation occurred between May 2010 and March 2012. The mean age of participants was 82.9 years, and 665 (64%) were female. No adverse events attributable to the intervention were recorded. Of the 1042 participants, 870 (83%) were included in the analysis of the primary outcome (intervention, n = 479; control, n = 391). The primary outcome showed no significant differences between groups. The adjusted mean difference in the BI score between groups was 0.19 points higher in the intervention arm [95% confidence interval (CI) -0.33 to 0.70, p = 0.48; adjusted intracluster correlation coefficient 0.09]. Secondary outcome measures showed no significant differences at all time points. Mean incremental cost of the Occupational Therapy intervention for residents with stroke living in UK Care Homes intervention was £438.78 (95% CI -£3360.89 to £1238.46) and the incremental QALY gain was 0.009 (95% CI -0.030 to 0.048)., Limitations: A large proportion of participants with very severe activity-based limitations and cognitive impairment may have limited capacity to engage in therapy., Conclusion: A 3-month individualised course of OT showed no benefit in maintaining functional activity in an older care home population with stroke-related disabilities., Future Work: There is an urgent need to reduce health-related complications caused by inactivity and to provide an enabling built environment within care homes., Trial Registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN00757750., Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 20, No. 15. See the Health Technology Assessment programme website for further project information.

Introduction: Approximately 70% of patients with stroke experience impaired arm function, which is persistent and disabling for an estimated 40%. Loss of function reduces independence in daily activities and impacts on quality of life. Muscles in those who do not recover functional movement in the stroke affected arm are at risk of atrophy and contractures, which can be established as early as 6 weeks following stroke. Pain is also common. This study aims to evaluate the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial to test the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of delivering early intensive electrical stimulation (ES) to prevent post-stroke complications in the paretic upper limb., Methods and Analysis: This is a feasibility randomised controlled trial (n=40) with embedded qualitative studies (patient/carer interviews and therapist focus groups) and feasibility economic evaluation. Patients will be recruited from the Stroke Unit at the Nottingham University Hospitals National Health Service (NHS) Trust within 72 h after stroke. Participants will be randomised to receive usual care or usual care and early ES to the wrist flexors and extensors for 30 min twice a day, 5 days a week for 3 months. The initial treatment(s) will be delivered by an occupational therapist or physiotherapist who will then train the patient and/or their nominated carer to self-manage subsequent treatments., Ethics and Dissemination: This study has been granted ethical approval by the National Research Ethics Service, East Midlands Nottingham1 Research Ethics Committee (ref: 15/EM/0006). To our knowledge, this is the first study of its kind of the early application (within 72 h post-stroke) of ES to both the wrist extensors and wrist flexors of stroke survivors with upper limb impairment. The results will inform the design of a definitive randomised controlled trial. Dissemination will include 2 peer-reviewed journal publications and presentations at national conferences., Trial Registration Number: ISRCTN1648908; Pre-results. Clinicaltrials.gov ID: NCT02324634., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/)

Objective: To assess, in a sample of systematic reviews of non-pharmacological interventions, the completeness of intervention reporting, identify the most frequently missing elements, and assess review authors' use of and beliefs about providing intervention information., Design: Analysis of a random sample of systematic reviews of non-pharmacological stroke interventions; online survey of review authors., Data Sources and Study Selection: The Cochrane Library and PubMed were searched for potentially eligible systematic reviews and a random sample of these assessed for eligibility until 60 (30 Cochrane, 30 non-Cochrane) eligible reviews were identified., Data Collection: In each review, the completeness of the intervention description in each eligible trial (n=568) was assessed by 2 independent raters using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist. All review authors (n=46) were invited to complete a survey., Results: Most reviews were missing intervention information for the majority of items. The most incompletely described items were: modifications, fidelity, materials, procedure and tailoring (missing from all interventions in 97%, 90%, 88%, 83% and 83% of reviews, respectively). Items that scored better, but were still incomplete for the majority of reviews, were: 'when and how much' (in 31% of reviews, adequate for all trials; in 57% of reviews, adequate for some trials); intervention mode (in 22% of reviews, adequate for all trials; in 38%, adequate for some trials); and location (in 19% of reviews, adequate for all trials). Of the 33 (71%) authors who responded, 58% reported having further intervention information but not including it, and 70% tried to obtain information., Conclusions: Most focus on intervention reporting has been directed at trials. Poor intervention reporting in stroke systematic reviews is prevalent, compounded by poor trial reporting. Without adequate intervention descriptions, the conduct, usability and interpretation of reviews are restricted and therefore, require action by trialists, systematic reviewers, peer reviewers and editors., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/)

Objectives: To identify interventions that aim to reduce dependency in activities of daily living (ADL) in homecare service users. To determine: content; effectiveness in improving ability to perform ADL; and whether delivery by qualified occupational therapists influences effectiveness., Data Sources: The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, CINAHL, PsycINFO, OTseeker, PEDro, Web of Science, CIRRIE, and ASSIA., Review Methods: We included: randomised controlled trials, non-randomised controlled trials and controlled before and after studies. Two reviewers independently screened studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. A narrative synthesis of the findings was conducted., Results: Thirteen studies were included, totalling 4975 participants. Ten (77%) were judged to have risk of bias. Interventions were categorised as those termed 're-ablement' or 'restorative homecare' (n=5/13); and those involving separate components which were not described using this terminology (n=8/13). Content of the intervention and level of health professional input varied within and between studies. Effectiveness on ADL: eight studies included an ADL outcome, five favoured the intervention group, only two with statistical significance, both these were controlled before and after studies judged at high risk of bias. ADL outcome was reported using seven different measures. Occupational therapy: there was insufficient evidence to determine whether involvement of qualified occupational therapists influenced effectiveness., Conclusion: There is limited evidence that interventions targeted at personal ADL can reduce homecare service users' dependency with activities, the content of evaluated interventions varies greatly., (© The Author(s) 2015.)

Evidence-based interventions cannot be provided unless there is a clear understanding of what the intervention is. Many published randomized trials, systematic reviews, and guidelines contain incomplete intervention descriptions. For non-pharmacological interventions, such as stroke rehabilitation, the reporting is particularly poor. Contributors to this problem include lack of attention to this issue and awareness of what constitutes a complete intervention description by authors, reviewers, journals, and editors. Part of the solution is for authors to follow guidance about how to describe interventions, such as the Template for Intervention Description and Replication statement. Improving stroke interventions reporting will remove one of the current barriers to evidence-based care., (© 2015 World Stroke Organization.)

Objective: To evaluate the clinical efficacy of an established programme of occupational therapy in maintaining functional activity and reducing further health risks from inactivity in care home residents living with stroke sequelae., Design: Pragmatic, parallel group, cluster randomised controlled trial., Setting: 228 care homes (>10 beds each), both with and without the provision of nursing care, local to 11 trial administrative centres across the United Kingdom., Participants: 1042 care home residents with a history of stroke or transient ischaemic attack, including those with language and cognitive impairments, not receiving end of life care. 114 homes (n=568 residents, 64% from homes providing nursing care) were allocated to the intervention arm and 114 homes (n=474 residents, 65% from homes providing nursing care) to standard care (control arm). Participating care homes were randomised between May 2010 and March 2012., Intervention: Targeted three month programme of occupational therapy, delivered by qualified occupational therapists and assistants, involving patient centred goal setting, education of care home staff, and adaptations to the environment., Main Outcome Measures: Primary outcome at the participant level: scores on the Barthel index of activities of daily living at three months post-randomisation. Secondary outcome measures at the participant level: Barthel index scores at six and 12 months post-randomisation, and scores on the Rivermead mobility index, geriatric depression scale-15, and EuroQol EQ-5D-3L questionnaire, at all time points., Results: 64% of the participants were women and 93% were white, with a mean age of 82.9 years. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups for all measures, personal characteristics, and diagnostic tests. Overall, 2538 occupational therapy visits were made to 498 participants in the intervention arm (mean 5.1 visits per participant). No adverse events attributable to the intervention were recorded. 162 (11%) died before the primary outcome time point, and 313 (30%) died over the 12 months of the trial. The primary outcome measure did not differ significantly between the treatment arms. The adjusted mean difference in Barthel index score at three months was 0.19 points higher in the intervention arm (95% confidence interval -0.33 to 0.70, P=0.48). Secondary outcome measures also showed no significant differences at all time points., Conclusions: This large phase III study provided no evidence of benefit for the provision of a routine occupational therapy service, including staff training, for care home residents living with stroke related disabilities. The established three month individualised course of occupational therapy targeting stroke related disabilities did not have an impact on measures of functional activity, mobility, mood, or health related quality of life, at all observational time points. Providing and targeting ameliorative care in this clinically complex population requires alternative strategies.Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN00757750., (© Sackley et al 2015.)

Background: Homecare re-ablement services have been developed by local authorities in England in response to the government agenda for health and social care. These services aim to optimize users' independence and ability to cope at home, and reduce the need for ongoing health and social care services. However, there is currently limited evidence and guidance regarding the optimum configuration and delivery of re-ablement services. In particular, the impact of occupational therapy input on service user outcomes has been highlighted as a specific research priority., Methods/design: This feasibility randomized controlled trial (RCT) will recruit 50 people from one local authority led homecare re-ablement service in England. Those who provide informed consent will be randomized to receive either usual homecare re-ablement (without routine occupational therapy input) or usual homecare re-ablement plus an enhanced program targeted at activities of daily living (ADL), delivered by an occupational therapist. The primary aim of this study is to assess the feasibility of conducting a further, powered study. The participant outcomes assessed will be independence in personal and extended ADL, health and social care-related quality of life, number of care support hours, falls, acute and residential admissions and use of health and social care services. These will be assessed at two weeks, three months and six months post-discharge from the re-ablement service., Discussion: To our knowledge, this is the first RCT of occupational therapy in homecare re-ablement services. The results of this study will lay the foundations for a further powered study. The findings will be relevant to researchers, clinicians, commissioners and users of adult social care services., Trial Registration: Current Controlled Trials registration number: ISRCTN21710246 (registered on 31March 2014).

Background: There is currently no standardized process for long-term follow-up care. As a result, management of poststroke care varies greatly, and the needs of stroke survivors are not fully addressed. The Post Stroke Checklist was developed by the Global Stroke Community Advisory Panel as a means of standardizing long-term stroke care. Since its development, the Post Stroke Checklist has gained international recognition from various stroke networks and is endorsed by the World Stroke Organization to support improved stroke survivor follow-up and care., Aims: The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and usefulness of the Post Stroke Checklist in clinical practice and assess its relevance to stroke survivors in pilot studies in the United Kingdom and Singapore., Methods: The Post Stroke Checklist was administered to stroke survivors in the United Kingdom (n = 42) and Singapore (n = 100) by clinicians. To assess the feasibility of the Post Stroke Checklist in clinical practice, an independent researcher observed the assessment and made notes relating to the patient-clinician interaction and their interpretations of the Post Stroke Checklist items. Patient and clinician satisfaction with the Post Stroke Checklist was assessed by three questions, responded to on a 0-10 numerical rating scale. Clinicians also completed a Pragmatic Face and Content Validity test to evaluate their overall impressions of the Post Stroke Checklist. In the United Kingdom, a subset of patients (n = 14) took part in a concept elicitation interview prior to being administered the Post Stroke Checklist, followed by a cognitive debriefing interview to assess relevance and comprehension of the Post Stroke Checklist., Results: The Post Stroke Checklist identified frequently reported problems for stroke survivors including cognition (reported by 47·2% of patients), mood (43·7%), and life after stroke (38%). An average of 3·2 problems per patient was identified across both countries (range 0-10). An average of 5 and 2·6 problems per patient were identified in the United Kingdom and Singapore, respectively. The average time taken to administer the Post Stroke Checklist was 17 mins (standard deviation 7·5) in Singapore and 13 mins (standard deviation 7·6) in the United Kingdom. Satisfaction ratings were high for patients (8·6/10) and clinicians (7·7/10), and clinician feedback via the Pragmatic Face and Content Validity test indicated that the Post Stroke Checklist is 'useful', 'informative', and 'exhaustive'. All concepts measured by the Post Stroke Checklist were spontaneously discussed by patients during the concept elicitation interviews, suggesting that the Post Stroke Checklist is relevant to stroke survivors. Cognitive debriefing data indicated that the items were generally well understood and relevant to stroke. Minor revisions were made to the Post Stroke Checklist based on patient feedback., Conclusions: The findings suggest that the Post Stroke Checklist is a feasible and useful measure for identifying long term stroke care needs in a clinical practice setting. Pilot testing indicated that the Post Stroke Checklist is able to identify a wide range of unmet needs, and patient and clinician feedback indicated a high level of satisfaction with the Post Stroke Checklist assessment. The items were generally well understood and considered relevant to stroke survivors, indicating the Post Stroke Checklist is a feasible, useful, and relevant measure of poststroke care., (© 2014 World Stroke Organization.)

Background: Stroke has a huge impact, leaving more than a third of affected people with lasting disability and rehabilitation remains a cornerstone treatment in the National Health Service (NHS). Recovery of mobility and arm function post-stroke occurs through re-learning to use the affected body parts and/or learning to compensate with the lesser affected side. Promising evidence suggests that the addition of Co-careldopa to physical therapy and occupational therapy may improve the recovery of arm and leg movement and lead to improved function., Methods/design: Dopamine Augmented Rehabilitation in Stroke (DARS) is a multi-centre double-blind, randomised, placebo, controlled clinical trial of Co-careldopa in addition to routine NHS occupational therapy and physical therapy as part of early stroke rehabilitation. Participants will be randomised on a 1:1 basis to either Co-careldopa or placebo. The primary objective of the trial is to determine whether the addition of six weeks of Co-careldopa treatment to rehabilitation therapy can improve the proportion of patients who can walk independently eight weeks post-randomisation., Discussion: The DARS trial will provide evidence as to whether Co-careldopa, in addition to routine NHS occupational and physical therapy, leads to a greater recovery of motor function, a reduction in carer dependency and advance rehabilitation treatments for people with stroke., Trial Registration: ISRCTN99643613 assigned on 4 December 2009.

Rationale, Aims and Objectives: This paper addresses the challenge of investigating fidelity in the implementation of a complex rehabilitation intervention designed to increase the level of independence in personal activities of daily living of stroke patients living in UK care homes. A programme theory of intervention fidelity was constructed to underpin a process evaluation running alongside a cluster randomized trial of the rehabilitation intervention., Methods: The programme theory has been constructed drawing on principles of realist evaluation. Using data from in-depth semi-structured interviews (n = 17) with all occupational therapists (OTs) and critical incident reports from the trial (n = 20), and drawing from frameworks for implementation, the programme theory was developed., Results: The programme theory incorporates four potential mechanisms through which fidelity within the trial can be investigated. These four programme theory areas are (1) the balancing of research and professional requirements that therapists performed in a number of areas while delivering the study interventions; (2) the OTs rapport building with care home staff; (3) the work focused on re-engineering the personal environments of care home patients; and (4) the learning about the intervention within the context of the trial and its impacts over time., Conclusions: These findings characterize the real-world nature of fidelity within intervention research, and specifically the negotiated nature of implementation within clinical settings, including individual patients' needs. This research adds to the evidence base because current frameworks for fidelity neglect the importance of learning over time of individuals and across the time span of a trial., (© 2014 The Authors. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Background: One-third of stroke patients are dependent on others to get outside their homes. This can cause people to become housebound, leading to increased immobility, poor health, isolation and misery. There is some evidence that outdoor mobility rehabilitation can reduce these limitations., Objective: To test the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of an outdoor mobility rehabilitation intervention for stroke patients., Design: Multicentre, parallel-group randomised controlled trial, with two groups allocated at a 1 : 1 ratio plus qualitative participant interviews., Setting: Fifteen UK NHS stroke services throughout England, Scotland and Wales., Participants: A total of 568 stroke patients who wished to get out of the house more often, mean age of 71 years: 508 reached the 6-month follow-up and 10 were interviewed., Intervention: Control was delivered prior to randomisation to all participants, and consisted of verbal advice and transport and outdoor mobility leaflets. Intervention was a targeted outdoor mobility rehabilitation programme delivered by 29 NHS therapists to 287 randomly chosen participants for up to 12 sessions over 4 months., Main Outcome Measures: Primary outcome was participant health-related quality of life, measured by the Short Form questionnaire-36 items, version 2 (Social Function domain), 6 months after baseline. Secondary outcomes were functional ability, mobility, number of journeys (from monthly travel diaries), satisfaction with outdoor mobility (SWOM), psychological well-being and resource use [health care and Personal Social Services (PSS)] 6 months after baseline. Carer well-being was recorded. All outcome measures were collected by post and repeated 12 months after baseline. Outcomes for the groups were compared using statistical significance testing and adjusted for multiple membership to account for the effect of multiple therapists at different sites. Interviews were analysed using interpretive phenomenology to explore confidence., Results: A median of seven intervention sessions [interquartile range (IQR) 3-7 sessions], median duration of 369 minutes (IQR 170-691.5 minutes) per participant was delivered. There was no significant difference between the groups on health-related quality of life (social function). There were no significant differences between groups in functional ability, psychological well-being or SWOM at 6- or 12-month follow-ups. There was a significant difference observed for travel journeys with the intervention group being 42% more likely to make a journey compared with the control group [rate ratio 1.42, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.14 to 1.67] at 6 months and 76% more likely (rate ratio 1.76, 95% CI 1.36 to 1.95) at 12 months. The number of journeys was affected by the therapist effect. The mean incremental cost (total NHS and PSS cost) of the intervention was £3413.75 (95% CI -£448.43 to £7121.00), with an incremental quality-adjusted life-year gain of -0.027 (95% CI -0.060 to 0.007) according to the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions and -0.003 (95% CI -0.016 to 0.006) according to the Short Form questionnaire-6 Dimensions. At baseline, 259 out of 281 (92.2%) participants in the control group were dissatisfied with outdoor mobility but at the 6-month assessment this had reduced to 77.7% (181/233), a 15% reduction. The corresponding reduction in the intervention group was slightly greater (21%) than 268 out of 287 (93.4%) participants dissatisfied with outdoor mobility at baseline to 189 out of 261 (72.4%) at 6 months. Participants described losing confidence after stroke as being detrimental to outdoor mobility. Recruitment and retention rates were high. The intervention was deliverable by the NHS but had a neutral effect in all areas apart from potentially increasing the number of journeys. This was dependent on the therapist effect, meaning that some therapists were more successful than others. The control appeared to affect change., Conclusions: The outdoor mobility intervention provided in this study to these stroke patients was not clinically effective or cost-effective. However, the provision of personalised information and monthly diaries should be considered for all people who wish to get out more., Trial Registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN58683841., Funding: This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 18, No. 29. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Objectives: To explore the perspectives of healthcare professionals and commissioners working with a stroke Early Supported Discharge service in relation to: (1) the factors that facilitate or impede the implementation of the service, and (2) the impact of the service., Design: Cross-sectional qualitative study using semi-structured interviews. Data were analysed by two researchers using a thematic analysis approach., Setting: Two Early Supported Discharge services in Nottinghamshire., Participants: Purposive sampling identified 35 key informants including practitioners, managers and commissioners., Results: The identified facilitators to the implementation of evidence-based services were: (1) the adaptability of the intervention to the healthcare context, (2) the role of rehabilitation assistants and (3) cross-service working arrangements. Perceived challenges included: (1) lack of clarity regarding the referral decision making process, (2) delays in securing social care input and (3) lack of appropriate follow-on services in the region. Most respondents perceived the impact of the services to be: (1) reducing in-hospital stay, (2) aiding the seamless transfer of care from hospital to the community and (3) providing intensive stroke specific therapy. Commissioners called for greater evidence of service impact and clarity regarding where it fits into the stroke pathway., Conclusions: Early Supported Discharge services were perceived as successful in providing home-based, stroke specific rehabilitation. Teams would benefit from capitalising on identified facilitators and developing strategies to address the challenges. The remit and impact of the services should be clear and demonstrable, with teams strengthening links with other health and social care providers.

Objective: To assess the treatment integrity of behavioural therapy for low mood in stroke patients with aphasia., Design: Participants were recruited to a multicentre randomized controlled trial (Communication and Low Mood; CALM trial) comparing behavioural therapy with a usual care control group., Subjects: Of the 51 participants randomly allocated to receive behavioural therapy, 44 participants completed treatment., Methods: Participants were assessed on measures of disability, language and mood. The number and length of therapy sessions, and therapist was recorded. Allocation of time to therapy components was compared across three phases of therapy. Associations between levels of disability, aphasia, mood and the therapy patients received were determined. Therapy content was compared between centres and at the beginning and end of the trial., Results: The mean number of therapy sessions was 9.1 (range 3-18, SD 2.6) and the mean duration of sessions was 58 minutes (range 30-89 minutes, SD 10.7). Allocation of time to each therapy component significantly differed across the three phases of therapy (P < 0.05). There were no significant associations (P > 0.05) between the length and number of sessions and patients' aphasia, mood or disability, suggesting similar levels of therapy were provided regardless of patients' characteristics. The content of therapy showed some differences between centres (P < 0.01) and there was programme drift in some components of therapy., Conclusions: The results support the ability of the therapists to deliver behavioural therapy according to the treatment manual. However there were differences between centres and over time in some components of therapy.

Background: Long-term care for stroke survivors is fragmented and lacks an evidence-based, easy-to-use tool to identify persistent long-term problems among stroke survivors and streamline referral for treatment. We sought to develop a poststroke checklist (PSC) to help health care professionals identify poststroke problems amenable to treatment and subsequent referral., Methods: An instrument development team, supported by measurement experts, international stroke experts, and poststroke care stakeholders, was created to develop a long-term PSC. A list of long-term poststroke problem areas was generated by an international, multidisciplinary group of stroke experts, the Global Stroke Community Advisory Panel. Using Delphi methods, a consensus was reached on which problem areas on the list were most important and relevant to include in a PSC. The instrument development team concurrently created the actual checklist, which provided example language about how to ask about poststroke problem areas and linked patient responses to a specific referral process., Results: Eleven long-term poststroke problem areas were rated highly and consistently among stroke experts participating in the Delphi process (n = 12): secondary prevention, activities of daily living, mobility, spasticity, pain, incontinence, communication, mood, cognition, life after stroke, and relationship with caregiver. These problem areas were included in the long-term PSC., Conclusions: The PSC was developed to be a brief and easy-to-use tool, intended to facilitate a standardized approach for health care providers to identify long-term problems in stroke survivors and to facilitate appropriate referrals for treatment., (Copyright © 2013 National Stroke Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To investigate patients' and carers' experiences of Early Supported Discharge services and inform future Early Supported Discharge service development and provision., Design and Subjects: Semi-structured interviews were completed with 27 stroke patients and 15 carers in the Nottinghamshire region who met evidence-based Early Supported Discharge service eligibility criteria. Participants were either receiving Early Supported Discharge or conventional services., Setting: Community stroke services in Nottinghamshire, UK., Results: A thematic analysis process was applied to identify similarities and differences across datasets. Themes specific to participants receiving Early Supported Discharge services were: the home-based form of rehabilitation; speed of response; intensity and duration of therapy; respite time for the carer; rehabilitation exercises and provision of technical equipment; disjointed transition between Early Supported Discharge and ongoing rehabilitation services. Participants receiving Early Supported Discharge or conventional community services experienced difficulties related to: limited support in dealing with carer strain; lack of education and training of carers; inadequate provision and delivery of stroke-related information; disjointed transition between Early Supported Discharge and ongoing rehabilitation services., Conclusions: Accelerated hospital discharge and home-based rehabilitation was perceived positively by service users. The study findings highlight the need for Early Supported Discharge teams to address information and support needs of patients and carers and to monitor their impact on carers in addition to patients, using robust outcome measures.

Background: Recovery from stroke requires the provision of specialist rehabilitative care, yet there is a lack of research evidence on optimal methods of delivery and inequitable service provision across countries. Following consensus on Early Supported Discharge, our aim was to define core components of evidence-based community stroke services., Design: We used a modified Delphi approach with a purposive sample of 26 UK-based expert panellists (10 academics, 15 stroke service leads or commissioners, one stroke survivor). Statements based on research literature and policy documents were generated by an independent, mixed academic and service improvement team of nine. In three rounds of consultation panellists indicated their level of agreement with statements. Free text comments were analysed thematically., Results: Consensus of opinion (>70% agreement) was obtained on 76 of 80 statements. Panellists agreed that stroke specialist care tailored to clinical need should be provided following discharge from hospital. Flexible care pathways should be commissioned and provided through strategic and collaborative leadership across health and social care. Teams need to deliver stroke specialist rehabilitation, handing over responsibility to non-specialist services when patient rehabilitation goals have been met. Lack of consensus on whether to provide services exclusively for stroke patients and the need of support for carers highlights areas for further research., Conclusions: Consensus on the provision of evidence-based community stroke rehabilitation has been reached. Commissioning services with a clearly defined remit, which can deliver tailored care to individual stroke patients, is a challenge that needs further exploration.

Background: There is a growing demand for services whereby individuals receive assistance from care workers for personal care within the home. This has led to the development of re-ablement or restorative homecare services that provide time-limited input aimed at reducing dependency in personal activities of daily living, and preventing or delaying the need for further homecare support. However, little is currently known about how such interventions are configured, or how they may affect individuals' ability to carry out personal care independently., Methods/design: We will seek to identify studies that compare an intervention designed to reduce dependency in personal activities of daily living with routine input or usual care as the control. We will include randomised controlled trials, nonrandomised controlled trials, and controlled before and after studies. We will also include interrupted time series studies. We shall search electronic databases in addition to searching for ongoing and unpublished studies, and where appropriate will contact key authors. Two reviewers will independently screen articles for inclusion; will assess risk of bias using quality assessment tools; and will carry out data extraction using pre-prepared forms. Any disagreements, at any stage, will be resolved by discussion and the involvement of a third reviewer if needed. We will produce a narrative summary of the results. A meta-analysis will be conducted if sufficient data are available of appropriate quality and comparability., Discussion: The findings from this review will inform future practice within homecare re-ablement services; will inform policy decisions about the structure, organisation and content of such services; and will identify areas where further research is warranted., Trial Registration: This review protocol has been registered on the PROSPERO database (CRD42013004163).

Background: Stroke is a worldwide problem and is a leading cause of adult disability, resulting in dependency in activities of daily living (ADL) for around half of stroke survivors. It is estimated that up to 25% of all care home residents in the USA and in the UK have had a stroke. Stroke survivors who reside in care homes are likely to be more physically and cognitively impaired and therefore more dependent than those able to remain in their own home. Overall, 75% of care home residents are classified as severely disabled, and those with stroke are likely to have high levels of immobility, incontinence and confusion, as well as additional co-morbidities. It is not known whether this clinically complex population could benefit from occupational therapy in the same way as community-dwelling stroke survivors. The care home population with stroke differs from the general stroke population living at home, and a review was needed to examine the benefits of occupational therapy provided to this specific group. This review therefore focused on occupational therapy interventions for ADL for stroke survivors residing in care homes., Objectives: To measure the effects of occupational therapy interventions (provided directly by an occupational therapist or under the supervision of an occupational therapist) targeted at improving, restoring and maintaining independence in ADL among stroke survivors residing in long-term institutional care, termed collectively as 'care homes'. As a secondary objective, we aimed to evaluate occupational therapy interventions for reducing complications such as depression and low mood., Search Methods: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (August 2012), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, September 2012), MEDLINE (1948 to September 2012), EMBASE (1980 to September 2012), CINAHL (1982 to September 2012) and 10 additional bibliographic databases and six trials registers. We also handsearched seven journals, checked reference lists and obtained further information from individual trialists., Selection Criteria: Randomised controlled trials investigating the impact of an occupational therapy intervention for care home residents with stroke versus standard care., Data Collection and Analysis: The lead review author performed all searches. Two review authors then independently assessed all titles and abstracts of studies and selected trials for inclusion, with a third review author resolving any discrepancies. The same two review authors independently extracted data from all included published sources to ensure reliability. Primary outcomes were performance in ADL at the end of scheduled follow-up and death or a poor outcome. Secondary outcomes aimed to reflect the domains targeted by an occupational therapy intervention., Main Results: We included in the review one study involving 118 participants. We found one ongoing study that also met the inclusion criteria for the review, but the data were not yet available., Authors' Conclusions: We found insufficient evidence to support or refute the efficacy of occupational therapy interventions for improving, restoring or maintaining independence in ADL for stroke survivors residing in care homes. The effectiveness of occupational therapy for the population of stroke survivors residing in care homes remains unclear, and further research in this area is warranted.

Objective: The aim was to evaluate behavioural therapy as a treatment for low mood in people with aphasia., Design: A randomized controlled trial comparing behavioural therapy plus usual care with a usual care control. Potential participants with aphasia after stroke were screened for the presence of low mood. Those who met the criteria and gave consent were randomly allocated., Setting: Participants were recruited from hospital wards, community rehabilitation, speech and language therapy services and stroke groups., Subjects: Of 511 people with aphasia identified, 105 had low mood and were recruited., Interventions: Behavioural therapy was offered for up to three months. Outcomes were assessed three and six months after random allocation., Main Measures: Stroke Aphasic Depression Questionnaire, Visual Analog Mood Scales 'sad' item, and Visual Analogue Self-Esteem Scale., Results: Participants were aged 29 to 94 years (mean 67.0, SD 13.5) and 66 (63%) were men. Regression analysis showed that at three months, when baseline values and communication impairment were controlled for, group allocation was a significant predictor of the Stroke Aphasic Depression Questionnaire (P < 0.05), visual analogue 'sad' (P = 0.03), and Visual Analogue Self-Esteem Scale (P < 0.01). At six months, group alone was a significant predictor of the Stroke Aphasic Depression Questionnaire (P < 0.05), and remained significant when baseline values were controlled for (P = 0.02). Mean Stroke Aphasic Depression Questionnaire 10-item hospital version scores decreased from baseline to six months by six points in the intervention group as compared with an increase of 1.9 points in the control group., Conclusions: Behavioural therapy seemed to improve the mood of people with aphasia.

Background: Illness perceptions have been shown to predict patient activities. Therefore, studies of the effectiveness of a targeted illness-perception intervention on chronic nonspecific low back pain (CLBP) are needed., Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of treatment of illness perceptions against a waiting list for patients with CLBP., Design: This was a prospectively registered randomized controlled trial with an assessor blinded for group allocation., Setting: The study was conducted in an outpatient rehabilitation clinic., Participants: The participants were 156 patients (18-70 years of age) with CLBP (>3 months)., Intervention: Patients were randomly assigned to either a treatment group or to a waiting list (control) group. Trained physical therapists and occupational therapists delivered 10 to 14 one-hour treatment sessions according to the treatment protocol., Measurements: The primary outcome measure was change in patient-relevant physical activities (patient-specific complaints questionnaire). The secondary outcome measures were changes in illness perceptions (illness perceptions questionnaire) and generic physical activity level (quebec back pain disability scale). Measurements were taken at baseline (0 weeks) and after treatment (18 weeks)., Results: A baseline-adjusted analysis of covariance showed that there were statistically significant differences between intervention and control groups at 18 weeks for the change in patient-relevant physical activities. This was a clinically relevant change (19.1 mm) for the intervention group. Statistically significant differences were found for the majority of illness perception scales. There were no significant differences in generic physical activity levels., Limitations: Longer-term effectiveness was not studied., Conclusions: This first trial evaluating cognitive treatment of illness perceptions concerning CLBP showed statistically significant and clinically relevant improvements in patient-relevant physical activities at 18 weeks.