Search

Purpose: To evaluate functional outcomes, care needs and cost-efficiency of specialist rehabilitation for a multi-centre cohort of inpatients with spinal cord injury (SCI)-comparison based on age and aetiology.Methods and materials: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from the UK Rehabilitation Outcomes Collaborative (UKROC) national clinical database from 2012-2019. Adults with SCI admitted for a rehabilitation programme in levels 1 and 2 specialist rehabilitation Units in England, were included if they had valid UK Functional Assessment Measure (UK FIM + FAM) and Northwick Park Dependency Scale (NPDS) scores recorded on admission and discharge (n = 2506 of 3321 admissions).Results: Approximately 425 patients were admitted yearly. 1344(56%) patients were under 65. 736(29%) had traumatic aetiology. Older and Traumatic SCI patients were more likely to have cervical cord damage (X2, p < 0.001). There was a significant improvement in all parameters of functional independence (UK FIM + FAM) (p < 0.001), with the reduction in dependency and care costs (NPDS/NPCNA) (p < 0.001). 1817(72.5%) patients were discharged home. Mean care-costs savings were £25 500/year per patient. Year-on-year trends showed admissions with increasing age, higher complexity and dependency with corresponding increasing episode costs (ANOVA p < 0.001). However, the time taken to offset the cost of rehabilitation did not change significantly (ANOVA p = 0.57).Conclusions: Specialist rehabilitation services provide effective and cost-efficient rehabilitation for patients with spinal cord injury.Implications for RehabilitationApproximately a third of patients who access specialist inpatient rehabilitation following spinal cord injury (SCI) in England are managed in the Specialist Level 1 and 2 neuro-rehabilitation units, rather than in the eight designated national SCI Centres.Despite admitting progressively more complex and dependent patients over eight years, these specialist rehabilitation units continue to provide highly cost-efficient care.The mean annual savings amount to £25,500 per patient. With a mean admission rate of 425 patients, this would generate total savings in excess of £10 million per year for the cohort.Specialist rehabilitation services play an important, but under-recognised, role in the spinal cord injury care pathway.

The aim of this study is to evaluate the properties of the Leg Activity measure according to COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments.Participants were assessed at baseline, one day, 6 weeks and 12 weeks, following treatment for leg spasticity with botulinum toxin and physical interventions.In stage 1, 64 participants were recruited to evaluate the initial psychometric properties of Leg Activity measure. In stage 2, 100 additional participants were recruited, to evaluate the scaling properties. Total sample of 164 participants was used. Construct validity was supported for "passive function", "active function" and "impact on quality of life". Cronbach's alpha was 0.86, 0.97 and 0.87 respectively for the scales. Item level test-retest agreement ranged from 91-97% (Kappa 0.75-0.95). Following treatment for spasticity (The study provides support for the Leg Activity measure being valid, reliable and responsive.Implications for rehabilitationThe Leg Activity measure is the only published self-report measure in the current literature that addresses passive and active function as well as impact on quality of life, of the paretic leg in a comprehensive manner.The initial evaluation of Leg Activity measure psychometric properties, in relation to the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments checklist and Medical Outcomes Trust Quality Criteria, supports its measurement properties for clinical and research use.The Leg Activity measure as a valid, reliable and responsive tool for the evaluation of treatment in leg spasticity including condition specific (spasticity) quality-of-life.

Background/Aims: To compare patient outcomes following botulinum toxin (BoNT) injection by either physiotherapy or rehabilitation medicine (medical) professionals over a 3-year period. Methods: A retrospective, observational cohort study was conducted in a specialised rehabilitation service providing spasticity management including BoNT injection and physical therapy (group therapy, individual therapy, self-exercise, and physical management programmes). Individualised goals were established before treatment using goal attainment scaling (GAS) by the multidisciplinary team. The Arm Activity measure (ArmA) was used to evaluate upper limb function and the Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS) used to evaluate spasticity. Findings: A total of 262 patients were injected. Mean GAS T-score after treatment for the group was 50.2 ± 6.7. GAS T-score for physiotherapy injectors (n=214 (82% of participants)) was 50.2 ± 6.4 and for rehabilitation medicine injectors (n=48 (18%)) 50.3 ± 7.9. No significant differences were identified in terms of goal achievement, upper limb passive function, or spasticity reduction between physiotherapy and rehabilitation medicine injectors. Differences were identified at both baseline (physiotherapist mean 49.7; rehabilitation medicine mean 46.6) and follow-up for active function (physiotherapist mean=49.7; rehabilitation medicine mean=47.8) (ArmA active function subscale; p=0.03). No reportable adverse effects were recorded. No difference in the complexity of injection (such as complex clinical presentation, anticoagulation, or technical difficulty) between the injector groups was identified. Conclusions: Clinical outcomes were comparable between physiotherapy and rehabilitation medicine injectors. No difference in side effect profile or complexity of injection was identified. In this cohort, injection of BoNT by a physiotherapist was as effective in terms of GAS as that undertaken by a rehabilitation medicine physician.

BACKGROUND: Goal-classification of person-centred goals, using Goal Attainment Scaling for leg spasticity treatment.METHODS: The study was conducted in two phases: phase I, a retrospective review to evaluate categories of goal set in routine clinical practice. Findings were used to design a goal classification system. Phase II, a multi-centre study to confirm the goal categories. Goals set (n = 270) were analysed from data collected at three centres in the UK (one centre for phase I). Goal categories were mapped onto the domains of the World Health Organisation, International Classification of Functioning Disability and Health.RESULTS: One hundred and twenty seven participants were recruited in two cohorts: phase I: 63; phase II: 64. Goal categories using both cohorts were assigned to two domains, each subdivided into three key goal categories: Domain 1: body structure impairment 121 (44%): (a) pain/discomfort 34 (12%), (b) involuntary movements 20 (7%), and (c) range of movement/contracture prevention 67 (25%). Domain 2: activity function 149 (56%): (a) passive function (ease of caring for the affected limb) n = 89 (33%), (b) active function (transfers) 26 (10%), and (c) active function (mobility) 27 (10%), other n = 7 (3%).CONCLUSIONS: Patients individual leg spasticity goals can be grouped into six categories and two domains, which will assist clinicians, patients and cares in setting and evaluating goals in practice. Implications for Rehabilitation Six goal areas used in clinical goal setting for leg spasticity management were identified, under the two domains: (1) body structure impairment: pain, involuntary movements, and range of movement and (2) activities/function: passive function (ease of caring), active function - transfers or standing and active function - mobility. Categorisation of goals is consistent on repeated evaluation and across different clinical services. Using clinical goals for leg spasticity treatment is an effective method to identify treatment priorities.

Application of the Leg Activity measure in acquired brain injury spasticity intervention to identify areas for goal setting prior to treatment, document the treatments applied and evaluate outcome.A prospective cohort from three specialist spasticity management centres was used. Primary outcome measures were, Leg Activity Measure, Modified Ashworth Scale and Goal Attainment Scaling - light. Measurement was completed at baseline, 6 and 12 weeks. The Leg-Therapy recording Schedule was used to record physical therapy intervention.Participants (Significant gains in passive-function and quality-of-life were recorded by the Leg Activity measure scales at 6 weeks, and at 12 weeks post-injection in the context of on-going physical treatment, primarily by self-management.Implications for rehabilitationThe Leg Activity measure is able to detected changes in passive function and impact on quality of life.Measurement of change in active function is also likely to be detected, but was not seen in the cohort studied.The Leg Activity measure was effective in this study in identifying problem areas to enable setting of treatment goals and planning of treatment intervention.

Interactive Smart Agents (ISA) like Amazon Echo are rapidly becoming part of our households. These devices are controlled by the user through conversations in natural language. In turn, these agents control other smart devices around the house. Similar control functionalities are provided by Environmental Control (EC) devices issued to people with severe mobility impairments. EC devices are controlled by scan and click methods (also known as switch methods). In case of severe physical impairments such EC control mechanisms become time consuming, frustrating and undignified. These methods rely on the little available mobility of these patients and don't allow them to use the intact cognitive and communication skills they typically retain. This paper argues that an EC device based on voice-controlled ISA could be an option to enable SCI patients to have a better quality of life. However, the current design and development of ISA devices makes them dependent on internet for all the speech processing. Which raises issues related to reliability, security and privacy. ISA devices are designed as mainstream consumer technology. However, the patients' demand for ISA instead of traditional EC devices is growing. However due to the shortfalls, ISA are only prescribed in pilot cases. If the technology and design of ISA were to be addressed, they would represent a significant saving to the National Health Services (NHS). This paper aims to highlight the need for a user-centered investigation on the design of ISA based EC devices.

Bilateral anterior opercular syndrome, also known as Foix-Chavany-Marie syndrome, is relatively rare and is characterized by inability of voluntary activation of facial, lingual, pharyngeal, and masticatory muscles with preserved automatic and reflex movements such as smiling and yawning. The syndrome is caused by bilateral lesions of the anterior opercula and results in severe impairments with speech and swallowing. This article describes a patient with bilateral anterior opercular syndrome secondary to embolic strokes and how neuro-rehabilitation improved symptoms.

Available online 18 September 2018. It has recently been revealed that spatial neglect can be modulated by motivational factors including anticipated monetary reward. A number of dopaminergic agents have been evaluated as treatments for neglect, but the results have been mixed, with no clear anatomical or cognitive predictors of dopaminergic responsiveness. Given that the effects of incentive motivation are mediated by dopaminergic pathways that are variably damaged in stroke, we tested the hypothesis that the modulatory influences of reward and dopaminergic drugs on neglect are themselves related. We employed a single-dose, double-blind, crossover design to compare the effects of Co-careldopa and placebo on a modified visual cancellation task in patients with neglect secondary to right hemisphere stroke. Whilst confirming that reward improved visual search in this group, we showed that dopaminergic stimulation only enhances visual search in the absence of reward. When patients were divided into REWARD-RESPONDERs and REWARD-NON-RESPONDERs, we found an interaction, such that only REWARD-NONRESPONDERs showed a positive response to reward after receiving Co-careldopa, whereas REWARD-RESPONDERs were not influenced by drug. At a neuroanatomical level, responsiveness to incentive motivation was most associated with intact dorsal striatum. These findings suggest that dopaminergic modulation of neglect follows an ‘inverted U’ function, is dependent on integrity of the reward system, and can be measured as a behavioural response to anticipated reward. This study was directly supported by the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at Imperial College London and a HEFCE Clinical Senior Lectureship Award to PM. D.S. acknowledges support from the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (MINECO), through the 'Severo Ochoa' Programme for Centres/Units of Excellence in R&D (SEV-2015-490) and project grants PSI2016-76443-P from MINECO and PI-2017-25 from the Basque Government.

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows: Specific questions that will be addressed in this review include: Does vocational rehabilitation enable adult survivors of ABI return to and stay in employment? What approaches are effective and in what setting? Does Vocational rehabilitation provide demonstrable cost‐benefits?

Background and Aims: The Arm Activity measure (ArmA) is a new measure for recording the pattern of change in passive function after focal spasticity intervention. This study aimed to demonstrate the application of the ArmA for measuring passive and active functional movement. Methods An open-label prospective cohort study was conducted within a two-centre specialist spasticity management program. Outcome measures used were the ArmA, the Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS) and the Leeds Adult Spasticity Impact Scale (LASIS). Measurement was undertaken at baseline, at 8 weeks and at 16 weeks. Participants (n=58) presenting for treatment of upper limb spasticity were included and comprised of 32 men and 26 women, with a mean age of 47 years (SD=17.5). Participants received a single administration of BoNT (Dysport®, Ipsen, Slough, UK; or BOTOX®, Allergan, Irvine, CA, USA) following baseline assessment as part of routine clinical practice. Results Significant changes were demonstrated over the 16-week period in both the MAS (Xr2=66.6; P2=11.9; PConclusion Significant gains in passive function were recorded by ArmA at 8 weeks, and maintained at 16 weeks post-injection in the context of on-going physical intervention.

BACKGROUND: Evidence from systematic reviews demonstrates that multi-disciplinary rehabilitation is effective in the stroke population, in which older adults predominate. However, the evidence base for the effectiveness of rehabilitation following acquired brain injury (ABI) in younger adults has not been established, perhaps because this scenario presents different methodological challenges in research. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of multi-disciplinary rehabilitation following ABI in adults 16 to 65 years of age. SEARCH METHODS: We ran the most recent search on 14 September 2015. We searched the Cochrane Injuries Group Specialised Register, The Cochrane Library, Ovid MEDLINE(R), Ovid MEDLINE(R) In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE(R) Daily and Ovid OLDMEDLINE(R), Embase Classic+Embase (OvidSP), Web of Science (ISI WOS) databases, clinical trials registers, and we screened reference lists. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing multi-disciplinary rehabilitation versus routinely available local services or lower levels of intervention; or trials comparing an intervention in different settings, of different intensities or of different timing of onset. Controlled clinical trials were included, provided they met pre-defined methodological criteria. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three review authors independently selected trials and rated their methodological quality. A fourth review author would have arbitrated if consensus could not be reached by discussion, but in fact, this did not occur. As in previous versions of this review, we used the method described by Van Tulder 1997 to rate the quality of trials and to perform a 'best evidence' synthesis by attributing levels of evidence on the basis of methodological quality. Risk of bias assessments were performed in parallel using standard Cochrane methodology. However, the Van Tulder system provided a more discriminative evaluation of rehabilitation trials, so we have continued to use it for our primary synthesis of evidence. We subdivided trials in terms of severity of brain injury, setting and type and timing of rehabilitation offered. MAIN RESULTS: We identified a total of 19 studies involving 3480 people. Twelve studies were of good methodological quality and seven were of lower quality, according to the van Tulder scoring system. Within the subgroup of predominantly mild brain injury, 'strong evidence' suggested that most individuals made a good recovery when appropriate information was provided, without the need for additional specific interventions. For moderate to severe injury, 'strong evidence' showed benefit from formal intervention, and 'limited evidence' indicated that commencing rehabilitation early after injury results in better outcomes. For participants with moderate to severe ABI already in rehabilitation, 'strong evidence' revealed that more intensive programmes are associated with earlier functional gains, and 'moderate evidence' suggested that continued outpatient therapy could help to sustain gains made in early post-acute rehabilitation. The context of multi-disciplinary rehabilitation appears to influence outcomes. 'Strong evidence' supports the use of a milieu-oriented model for patients with severe brain injury, in which comprehensive cognitive rehabilitation takes place in a therapeutic environment and involves a peer group of patients. 'Limited evidence' shows that specialist in-patient rehabilitation and specialist multi-disciplinary community rehabilitation may provide additional functional gains, but studies serve to highlight the particular practical and ethical restraints imposed on randomisation of severely affected individuals for whom no realistic alternatives to specialist intervention are available. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Problems following ABI vary. Consequently, different interventions and combinations of interventions are required to meet the needs of patients with different problems. Patients who present acutely to hospital with mild brain injury benefit from follow-up and appropriate information and advice. Those with moderate to severe brain injury benefit from routine follow-up so their needs for rehabilitation can be assessed. Intensive intervention appears to lead to earlier gains, and earlier intervention whilst still in emergency and acute care has been supported by limited evidence. The balance between intensity and cost-effectiveness has yet to be determined. Patients discharged from in-patient rehabilitation benefit from access to out-patient or community-based services appropriate to their needs. Group-based rehabilitation in a therapeutic milieu (where patients undergo neuropsychological rehabilitation in a therapeutic environment with a peer group of individuals facing similar challenges) represents an effective approach for patients requiring neuropsychological rehabilitation following severe brain injury. Not all questions in rehabilitation can be addressed by randomised controlled trials or other experimental approaches. For example, trial-based literature does not tell us which treatments work best for which patients over the long term, and which models of service represent value for money in the context of life-long care. In the future, such questions will need to be considered alongside practice-based evidence gathered from large systematic longitudinal cohort studies conducted in the context of routine clinical practice. Language: en