Use the Back button in your browser to see the other results of your search or to select another record.

Detailed Search Results

Effect of individualized coaching at home on walking capacity in subacute stroke patients: a randomized controlled trial (Ticaa'dom) [with consumer summary]
Mandigout S, Chaparro D, Borel B, Kammoun B, Salle J-Y, Compagnat M, Daviet J-C
Annals of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine 2021 Jul;64(4):101453
clinical trial
6/10 [Eligibility criteria: Yes; Random allocation: Yes; Concealed allocation: No; Baseline comparability: Yes; Blind subjects: No; Blind therapists: No; Blind assessors: No; Adequate follow-up: Yes; Intention-to-treat analysis: Yes; Between-group comparisons: Yes; Point estimates and variability: Yes. Note: Eligibility criteria item does not contribute to total score] *This score has been confirmed*

BACKGROUND: The gains in walking capacity achieved during rehabilitation often plateau, or are lost, when the patient returns home. Moreover, maintaining or increasing the patient's daily physical activity level after a stroke remains challenging. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a six-month individualized coaching program at home on walking capacity, as evaluated by the six-minute walk test in subacute stroke patients. METHODS: Stroke patients in the physical medicine and rehabilitation service participated in a monocentric observer blinded randomized controlled trial with two groups, intervention versus usual care control. The inclusion criteria were: age >= 18 years, first ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke, and stroke within < 6 months. Participants were randomly assigned (blocks of variable size) to an intervention group (EG) receiving individualized coaching on physical activity, or to a control group (CG) receiving standard care. The six-month program was composed of monitored physical activity, home visits and a weekly phone call. Participants were evaluated after hospital discharge (T0), at the end of the six-month program (T1) and six months later (follow-up; T2). The primary outcome was the walking distance performance, as evaluated with the six-minute walk test at T1. RESULTS: Eighty-three participants (age 61 y (IQR 22); time post-stroke 2.4 month (IQR 1.7); Barthel Index 100 (IQR 5)) were included in the study (EG n = 41; CG n = 42). The difference between the two groups was not significant at T1 (418 m (IQR 165) for the EG and 389 m (IQR 188) for the CG; p = 0.168) and at T2 (425m (IQR 121) for the EG versus 382m (IQR 219) for the CG; p = 0.208). CONCLUSION: Our study shows no difference in the six-minute walk test between the two groups of subacute stroke patients after 6 months of the individualized coaching program, combining home visits, feedback on daily performance and weekly telephone calls. http://ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01822938).

Full text (sometimes free) may be available at these link(s):      help