Background
Methods
Search strategy
Selection of relevant papers
Data extraction and synthesis
Author Year Country | Design (D) Setting (S) Sample size (SZ) | Target patient population | Intervention (I) Duration (D) Frequency (F) | Outcomes (O) Measure point (MP) |
---|---|---|---|---|
Everink et al. 2018 The Netherlands | D: Prospective cohort study S: Hospital, geriatric rehabilitation facility, community SZ: 149 patients 54 caregivers | Geriatric patients (> 65 years and complex health problems)Admitted to a geriatric rehabilitation facilityCommunity-dwelling prior to hospital admission | I: Integrated Care Pathway: Process of care during the trajectory of hospital admission, discharge to geriatric rehabilitation and discharge back to community. Patients and their caregiver are actively involved in the triage decision. D: Period of hospitalization (acute and rehabilitation) until discharge. F: Not stated | O: Patients:Basic functional performance (KI, FAI)Psychological well-being (CSAL)Caregivers:Psychological well-being (SRCB, CSAL) Others (Discharge location) MP: Admission geriatric rehabilitation, 3, 6 and 9 months |
Forster et al. 2013 UK | D: Multicentre cluster RCT S: 36 stroke units in four geographical regions. SZ: 928 patients 928 caregivers | Patient with stroke Medically stable Likely to return home | I: London Stroke Carers Training Course:Assessment of competencies in knowledge or skills essential for day-to-day management of disabled survivors of stroke (14 components). Intervention manual and caregiver training record. D: Period of hospitalization F: Not stated | O: Patients:Basic functional performance (NEADL, BI) Psychological well-being (HADS, EQ-5D) Caregivers: Psychological well-being (CBS, HADS, EQ-5D)Others (initial stroke admission cost) MP: Measured at: Baseline, 6 and 12 months |
Galvin et al. 2011 Ireland | D: RCT S: 6 acute hospitals SZ: 40 patients 40 caregivers | Patient with strokeNo cognitive impairment Participate in a physiotherapy program | I: Family-Mediated Exercise Intervention:Training the family member/friend with the skills necessary to carry out the exercise-training programme with the patient.Lower limb exercises designed to patient’s ability. Emphasis on achieving stability, gait velocity and strength D: 8 weeks F: Training the caregiver on a weekly basisExercises patient-caregiver 35 min daily | O: Patients:Basic functional performance (NEADL, BI, RNLI) Extended functional performance (LL-FMA, MAS, BBS, 6MWT)Caregivers:Psychological well-being (CSI) MP: Measured at: Baseline, 8 weeks and 3 months |
Gräsel et al. 2005 Germany | D: Non-randomized controlled trialS: 2 study wards of a rehabilitation clinic SZ: 71 patients 71 caregivers | Patient with strokeFunctional deficit Required treatment in rehabilitation clinic | I: Intensified Transition Concept:Psycho-educational seminar for family carers.Individual training course on bedside skills.Therapeutic weekend care, accompanied and monitored by an outpatient care service.Telephone counselling to assess the home situation D: Duration of hospitalization plus 3 months after discharge F: 1-h psycho-educational seminar3 times 45–60 min individual training course1 therapeutic weekend1 telephone counselling after 3 months | O: Patients:Basic functional performance (BI, FIM)Extended functional performance (TUG, ASS, FAT) Caregivers:Psychological well-being (BSFC, ZDS, GSL)Others (discharge readmission) MP: Measured at: After intervention, 4 weeks and 6 months |
Harris et al. 2010 Canada | D: Subgroup analysis of a RCT S: Multi-site SZ: 50 patients 50 caregivers | Patient with strokeActive scapular elevationFM scale 10–57 | I: Graded Repetitive Arm Supplementary Program with Caregiver Support:A self-administered upper-limb exercise program, using an exercise booklet and a kit tailored to motor impairment level.Exercises included range of motion, strengthening, and fine motor and goal-directed activities. D: 4 weeks F: Explanation of the program 1 hExercises 60 min a day, 6 days per weekCaregiver involvement > 2 times/week | O: Patients:Extended functional performance (CAAI, MAL, GS) MP: Measured at: Baseline and 4 weeks |
Hebel et al. 2014 Poland | D: Prospective pre-post study S: Hospital SZ: 243 patients 243 caregivers | Patient with stroke | I: Voluntary Health Education Program for Carers:Education on stroke and secondary prevention, proper patient positioning in bed and position changing techniques. D: During hospitalization F: One two-hour meeting | O: Patients:Basic functional performance (NEADL, BI, MRS) MP: Measured at: After intervention, 3 and 12 months |
Kalra et al. Patel et al. 2004UK | D: RCTblock randomisation S: Hospital, home setting SZ: 300 patients 300 caregivers | Patient with strokeIndependent in ADL before strokeMedically stableExpected to return home | I: Training Caregivers of Stroke Patients:Instructions on common stroke related problems, hands-on training in lifting and handling techniques, facilitation of mobility and transfers, tailored to the needs of individual patients. D: During hospitalizationF: 3–5 session of 30–45 min1 follow through session at home | O: Patients:Basic functional performance (BI, MRS, FAI) Psychological well-being (HADS, EQ VAS) Caregivers:Psychological well-being (CBS, HADS, EQ VAS)Others (length of stay, cost, readmission, mortality, discharge destination) MP: Measured at: Baseline, 1, 3, 6 and 12 months |
van den Berg et al. 2016 Australia | D: RCTS: Three hospitals and home setting SZ: 63 patients 63 caregivers | Patient with stroke Early rehabilitationMobility problemsNo cognitive problems No depression | I: Caregiver-Mediated Exercises:A customized exercise app (37 exercises) on a i-pad was provided to the patient and carer.Tele-rehabilitation services after discharge and weekly home visits. D: 8 weeks (hospital and home) F: ≥5 times per week 30 minweekly evaluation session with PT | O: Patients:Basic functional performance (NEADL, BI, MRS) Extended functional performance (SISmob, RMI, LL-FMA, MI, TUG, BBS) Psychological well-being (HADS)Caregivers:Psychological well-being (CSI, HADS) Others (Length of stay, Hospital readmission) MP: Measured at: Baseline, 8 weeks and 12 weeks |
Study Measure points | Basic ADL | Extended ADL | Others | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Everink et al 2018 | KI, mean (SD) | FAI, mean (SD) | ||||||||
T0= admission geriatric rehabilitation | T1 | T2 | T1 | T2 | ||||||
T1= 3 months | IG | 4.6 (2.4) | 4.4 (2.9) | 31.1 (9.4) | 31.0 (9.4) | |||||
T2= 9 months | CG | 5.7 (2.8) | 5.0 (3.0) | 27.4 (9.7) | 29.4 (11.2) | |||||
p = 0.360 | p = 0.862 | p = 0.014 | p = 0.288 | |||||||
Forster et al 2013 | NEADL, mean (SE) | |||||||||
T0= baseline | T1 | |||||||||
T1= 6 months | IG | 27.4 (1.00) | ||||||||
T2= 12 months | CG | 27.6 (0.99) | ||||||||
p = 0.866 | ||||||||||
Galvin et al 2011 | BI, mean change (SD) | NEADL, mean change (SD) | RNLI, mean change (SD) | |||||||
T0= baseline | T1 - T0 | T2 - T1 | T2 – T1 | T2 – T1 | ||||||
T1= 8 weeks | IG | 32.3 (24) | 3.8 (8.3) | 7.6 (8.3) | 4.7 (4.3) | |||||
T2= 3 months | CG | 16.3 (14.2) | 1.5 (11.6) | 3.6 (7.8) | 0.4 (2.9) | |||||
p = 0.04 | p = 0.36 | p = 0.02 | p = 0.00 | |||||||
Gräsel et al 2005 | BI, mean change (SD) | |||||||||
T2 – T0 | ||||||||||
T0= after intervention | IG | 11.4 (14.1) | ||||||||
T2= 6 months | CG | 11.2 (16.4) | ||||||||
p = 0.968 | ||||||||||
FIM, mean change (SD) | ||||||||||
T2 – T0 | ||||||||||
IG | 2.5 (12.9) | |||||||||
CG | 7.4 (12.2) | |||||||||
p = 0.129 | ||||||||||
Hebel et al 2014 | BI, median | NEADL, median | MRS, median | |||||||
T0= after intervention | T0 | T1 | T2 | T1 | T2 | T0 | T1 | T2 | ||
T1= 3 months | IG | 60 | 75 | 90 | 7 | 14 | 3 | 2 | 2 | |
T2= 12 months | CG | 72.5 | 85 | 90 | 13 | 14.5 | 2 | 2 | 2 | |
p = 0.02 | p = 0.07 | p = 0.65 | p = 0.004 | p = 0.27 | p = 0.11 | p = 0.18 | p = 0.53 | |||
Kalra/Patel et al 2004 | BI, BI >18 | FAI, median (IQR) | ||||||||
T0= baseline | T2 | T4 | T0 | T4 | ||||||
T2= 12 weeks | IG | 51.3% | 61.5% | 25 (20 - 29) | 15 (9 - 23) | |||||
T4= 52 weeks | CG | 34.8% | 50.3% | 24 (21 - 29) | 16 (8 - 22) | |||||
p = 0.007 | p = 0.074 | p = not stated | p= not stated | |||||||
van den Berg et al 2016 | BI, mean (95% CI) | NEADL, mean (95% CI) | ||||||||
T0= baseline | T1 | T2 | T1 | T2 | ||||||
T1= 8 weeks | IG | 89.3 (81.6 - 97) | 89.4 (81.7 - 97.1) | 14.3 (12.1-16.4) | 15.9 (13.8-18.1) | |||||
T2= 12 weeks | CG | 84.9 (78.7 - 91) | 88.7 (82.4 - 94.9) | 10.7 (9 - 12.4) | 12.9 (11.1-14.6) | |||||
p = 0.3811 | p = 0.8894 | p = 0.0118 | p= 0.0319 |
Study Measure points | Lower limb Walking | Upper limb | Others | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Galvin et al. 2011 | LL-FMA, mean change (SD) | MAS, mean change (SD) | BBS, mean change (SD) | ||||||
T0= baseline | T1- To | T2-T1 | T1-T0 | T2-T1 | T1-T0 | T2-T1 | |||
T1= 8 weeks | IG | 9.5 (9.9) | 1.6 (2.4) | 11.9 (7.8) | 37.9 (9.7) | 22.8 (18.1) | 0.9 (2.5) | ||
T2= 3 months | CG | 1.75 (6.3) | 1.3 (5.2) | 4.75 (6.2) | 35.2 (10.8) | 9 (9) | 1.8 (8.5) | ||
p = 0.01 | p = 0.12 | p = 0.00 | p = 0.59 | p = 0.02 | p = 0.7 | ||||
6MWT, mean change (SD) | |||||||||
T1-T0 | T2-T1 | ||||||||
IG | 164.1 (128.7) | 39.8 (55.4) | |||||||
CG | 47.2 (50.6 | -3.5 (32.7) | |||||||
p = 0.00 | p = 0.01 | ||||||||
Gräsel et al. 2005 | TUG, number possible (%) | FAT, mean change (SD) | ASS, mean change (SD) | ||||||
T0= after intervention | T0 | T2 | T2-T0 | T2-T0 | |||||
T1=4 weeks | IG | 26 (79%) | 31 (94%) | 0.3 (1.5) | 0.3 (1.0) | ||||
T2= 6 months | CG | 23 (79%) | 22 (76%) | 0.2 (0.8) | 0.0 (1.0) | ||||
p = 0.960 | p = 0.044 | p = 0.679 | p = 0.27 | ||||||
Harris et al. 2010 | MAL, mean change (SD) | GS, mean change (SD) | |||||||
T0= baseline | T1-T0 | T1-T0 | |||||||
T1= 4 weeks | IG | 2.1 (0.72) | 5.8 (3.1) | ||||||
CG | 1.0 (0.78) | 3.4 (2.4) | |||||||
p = 0.024 | p = 0.034 | ||||||||
CAAI, mean change (SD) | |||||||||
T1-T0 | |||||||||
IG | 20.6 (6.1) | ||||||||
CG | 15.0 (7.3) | ||||||||
p = 0.021 | |||||||||
van den Berg et al. 2016 | LL-FMA, mean (95% CI) | BBS, mean (95% CI) | |||||||
T0= baseline | T0 | T1 | T2 | T0 | T1 | T2 | |||
T1= 8 weeks | IG | 19.4 (16.3 - 22.6) | 26.1 (23 - 29.2) | 26.1 (22.9 - 29.2) | 31.8 (26 - 37.6) | 50.2 (44.3 - 56) | 49.8 (43.9 - 55.6) | ||
T2= 12 weeks | CG | 17.2 (14.8 - 19.7) | 22.4 (19.3 - 24.9) | 27.6 (24.9 - 30.3) | 26.7 (22.1 - 31.3) | 44.3 (39.7 - 49) | 46.3 (41.6 - 51) | ||
p = 0.2654 | p = 0.0721 | p = 0.4577 | p = 0.1752 | p = 0.1275 | p = 0.3681 | ||||
TUG, mean (95% CI) | SISmob, mean (95% CI) | ||||||||
T0 | T1 | T2 | T0 | T1 | T2 | ||||
IG | 34.2 (28.6 - 39.8) | 18.2 (12.6 - 23.8) | 17.5 (11.9 - 23.2) | 44.8 (36.8 - 52.8) | 82.3 (74.3 - 90.3) | 82.5 (74.5 - 90.4) | |||
CG | 44.2 (39.7 - 48.7) | 17.5 (12.9 - 22.1) | 14.1 (9.2 - 19) | 43.1 (36.8 - 49.4) | 72.5 (66 - 78.9) | 74.7 (68.2 - 81.2) | |||
p = 0.0075 | p = 0.8503 | p = 0.3704 | p = 0.7342 | p = 0.06 | p = 0.1382 | ||||
RMI, mean (95% CI) | |||||||||
T0 | T1 | T2 | |||||||
IG | 7.7 (6.3 - 9.1) | 12.6 (11.2 - 14) | 12.6 (11.2 - 14) | ||||||
CG | 6.8 (5.6 - 7.9) | 11.6 (10.5 - 12.8) | 12 (10.8 - 13.1) | ||||||
p = 0.2937 | p = 0.284 | p = 0.5245 | |||||||
MI, mean (95% CI) | |||||||||
T0 | T1 | T2 | |||||||
IG | 66.5 (60.1 - 72.9) | 78.5 (72.1 - 84.9) | 78.9 (72.5 - 85.3) | ||||||
CG | 62.4 (57.4 - 67.5) | 74.2 (69.1 - 79.3) | 83.5 (78.2 - 88.8) | ||||||
p = 0.3291 | p = 0.3058 | p = 0.2814 |