PURPOSE: Despite the growth of literature regarding community-based interventions (CBI) in low- to middle-income and high-income countries, its effectiveness in improving outcomes related to activities of daily living (ADL) and quality of life (QOL) in people with stroke is inconclusive. This systematic review compared the effectiveness of community-based interventions with the usual or hospital-based treatments in improving ADL and QOL outcomes in this population. METHOD: Four databases were systematically searched from inception until December 31, 2020, for relevant experimental studies from high-income and low- to middle-income countries that compared CBI with the usual/hospital rehabilitation on outcomes related to ADLs and QOL in clients with stroke. RESULTS: All the 10 experimental studies that were included came from highincome countries (Italy, United Kingdom, South Korea, Canada, and Australia), involving 1575 participants (806 males, 656 females, 113 not classified) with age range from 22 to 103 years. Seven articles measured ADL performance, and 10 measured QOL. Results indicated that CBI generally demonstrates improvement in ADL and QOL values similar to usual or hospital-based care. There was wide variability in the interventions described and the outcome measures used for both groups. Risk of bias assessment revealed issues with randomisation, blinding and follow-up. Stroke-specific baseline characteristics such as length of time since diagnosis and laterality varied considerably in all of the studies. CONCLUSION AND LIMITATIONS: CBI did not demonstrate significant difference in improving ADL and QOL outcomes for people with stroke compared to usual care, possibly due to the high quality of rehabilitation services existing in the countries where the studies took place. There is a need to use standardised outcome measures and interventions to ascertain these outcomes.

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

• DOI
• PDF locator
• publisher