Search

Background:Falls are common among stroke survivors but many are not taught how to get up again. A technique from an association called Action for Rehabilitation Following Neurological Injury addresses this problem. We investigated the feasibility and safety of teaching this technique to stroke survivors.Methods:Stroke survivors (mean 7.1 years post-stroke) with mild-to-moderate disability (mean modified Rankin Score 2.4), who could get up with assistance but not independently, received up to six sessions of training to independently get off the floor. The primary outcome was to independently get off the floor successfully; safety and feasibility were investigated by participant and trainer interviews, biomechanical and video analysis, and an expert panel review.Findings:Six of the ten participants managed to independently get off the floor and five of nine retained the skill two months post-training. One to six sessions (median three) were needed to master independently getting off the floor; one minor but no serious adverse events occurred. Expert reviewers indicated training involved an acceptable risk of falls and no concerns for knee and wrist positions.Conclusions:This feasibility study indicates that this technique may be useful. It was taught to and safely used by selected stroke survivors. Further assessment of independently getting off the floor has now been part of a pilot randomised controlled trial of Action for Rehabilitation Following Neurological Injury-based stroke rehabilitation.

Although childhood overweight and obesity prevalence has increased substantially worldwide in the past three decades, scarce evidence exists for effective preventive strategies. We aimed to establish whether a school-based intervention for children aged 9–10 years would prevent excessive weight gain after 24 months.

This perspective article explores whether pelvic-floor muscle training (PFMT) for the management of female urinary incontinence and prolapse is a physical therapy or a behavioral therapy. The primary aim is to demonstrate that it is both. A secondary aim is to show that the plethora of terms used for PFMT is potentially confusing and that current terminology inadequately represents the full intent, content, and delivery of this complex intervention. While physical therapists may be familiar with exercise terms, the details are often incompletely reported; furthermore, physical therapists are less familiar with the terminology used in accurately representing cognitive and behavioral therapy interventions, which results in these elements being even less well reported. Thus, an additional aim is to provide greater clarity in the terminology used in the reporting of PFMT interventions, specifically, descriptions of the exercise and behavioral elements. First, PFMT is described as a physical therapy and as an exercise therapy informed predominantly by the discipline of physical therapy. However, effective implementation requires use of the cognitive and behavioral perspectives of the discipline of psychology. Second, the theoretical underpinning of the psychology-informed elements of PFMT is summarized. Third, to address some identified limitations and confusion in current terminology and reporting, recommendations for ways in which physical therapists can incorporate the psychology-informed elements of PFMT alongside the more familiar exercise therapy–informed elements are made. Fourth, an example of how both elements can be described and reported in a PFMT intervention is provided. In summary, this perspective explores the underlying concepts of PFMT to demonstrate that it is both a physical intervention and a behavioral intervention and that it can and should be described as such, and an example of the integration of these elements into clinical practice is provided.