This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (4) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Björkdahl, A. Articles by Sunnerhagen, K. S. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Björkdahl, A. Articles by Sunnerhagen, K. S. Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Does a short period of rehabilitation in the home setting facilitate functioning after stroke? A randomized controlled trial

A°sa Lundgren Nilsson

Gunnar Grimby

Katharina Stibrant Sunnerhagen

Institute of Clinical Neuroscience - Rehabilitation Medicine, Göteborg University, Sweden

Objective: To assess the effect of three weeks of rehabilitation in the home setting for younger patients with stroke with the aim of improving activity level.

Design: A randomized controlled study with blinded evaluations at discharge, three weeks, three months and one year after discharge.

Setting: Home of the patient or the ordinary day rehabilitation clinic at the university hospital.

Subjects: Fifty-eight patients (median age 53 years) consecutively discharged from inpatient rehabilitation with a first occurrence of stroke participated in training directly after discharge.

Intervention: Rehabilitation was given for 9 hours/week over three weeks. The home group received individually tailored training, based on the patient's needs and desires, with a focus on activities in their natural context. Support and information were also given. The intervention in the day clinic group was aimed mainly at improved functions.

Main measures: The main outcome was activity, assessed with the Assessment of Motor and Process Skill (AMPS). The impairment level was also evaluated. Costs were estimated.

Result: There were no significant differences between the groups on any of the four assessments. However, there seemed to be an earlier improvement on some measures (including AMPS) for the home group. For both groups there was a greater improvement on the activity level than on the impairment level. The costs of the home group were less than half of the costs of the day clinic group.

Conclusion: With the present results, both rehabilitation programmes could be recommended, however, further studies are needed to define patients who may specifically benefit from the home rehabilitation programme. Costs should be taken into consideration.

Clinical Rehabilitation, Vol. 20, No. 12, 1038-1049 (2006)
DOI: 10.1177/0269215506071230


CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?