Predictive Value of Upper Extremity Outcome Measures After Stroke-A Systematic Review and Metaregression Analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Wolf S
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8222610 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BACKGROUND:Establishing which upper limb outcome measures are most commonly used in stroke studies may help in improving consensus among scientists and clinicians. OBJECTIVE:In this study we aimed to identify the most commonly used upper limb outcome measures in intervention studies after stroke and to describe domains covered according to ICF, how measures are combined, and how their use varies geographically and over time. METHODS:Pubmed, CinHAL, and PeDRO databases were searched for upper limb intervention studies in stroke according to PRISMA guidelines and477 studies were included. RESULTS:In studies 48different outcome measures were found. Only 15 of these outcome measures were used in more than 5% of the studies. The Fugl-Meyer Test (FMT)was the most commonly used measure (in 36% of studies). Commonly used measures covered ICF domains of body function and activity to varying extents. Most studies (72%) combined multiple outcome measures: the FMT was often combined with the Motor Activity Log (MAL), the Wolf Motor Function Test and the Action Research Arm Test, but infrequently combined with the Motor Assessment Scale or the Nine Hole Peg Test. Key components of manual dexterity such as selective finger movements were rarely measured. Frequency of use increased over a twelve-year period for the FMT and for assessments of kinematics, whereas other measures, such as the MAL and the Jebsen Taylor Hand Test showed decreased use over time. Use varied largely between countries showing low international consensus. CONCLUSIONS:The results showed a large diversity of outcome measures used across studies. However, a growing number of studies used the FMT, a neurological test with good psychometric properties. For thorough assessment the FMT needs to be combined with functional measures. These findings illustrate the need for strategies to build international consensus on appropriate outcome measures for upper limb function after stroke.
| S-EPMC4859525 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Stroke is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Over the past decade, plasma D-dimer levels have emerged as a biomarker for predicting stroke outcome. However, no consensus in the literature currently exists concerning its utility for predicting post-stroke functional outcome and mortality. Objective: To systematically review the effectiveness of plasma D-dimer levels for predicting functional outcome and mortality following stroke. Methods: Five academic databases were screened according to PRISMA guidelines for eligible studies. With these studies, we conducted a random-effect meta-analysis to evaluate the impact of plasma D-dimer levels for predicting functional outcome and mortality post-stroke. We also conducted subgroup analyses to evaluate differences in predictive capacity for different stroke subtypes. Results: Nineteen studies were included, containing data on 5,781 stroke patients (mean age: 65.26 ± 6.4 years). Overall methodological quality for the included studies was high. Meta-analysis showed that increased D-dimer levels were predictive of worsened functional outcomes (Hazard ratio: 2.19, 95% CI: 1.63-2.93) and elevated overall mortality (2.29, 1.35-3.88). Subgroup analysis showed that plasma D-dimer levels were more predictive of poorer functional outcomes for ischemic (2.08, 1.36-3.18) stroke as compared to intracerebral hemorrhage (2.62, 1.65-4.17). We also noted that predictive capacity was similar when it came to mortality in patients with cryptogenic ischemic stroke (2.65, 0.87-8.08) and intracerebral hemorrhage (2.63, 1.50-4.59). Conclusion: The study provides preliminary evidence concerning the capacity of plasma D-dimer levels for predicting functional outcomes and mortality following stroke and reports that higher D-dimer levels of are associated with poorer functional outcomes and higher mortality.
| S-EPMC8289899 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Because no gold-standard outcome measure or measures exist to allow comparison of pediatric stroke study outcomes in clinical trials, we designed a systematic review of the literature to survey the current use of pediatric stroke outcome measures. Studies that used at least 1 standardized measure to assess the outcome of children with ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke, from full-term newborn to age 18 years, were included. Although 34 studies were included, an additional 36 studies could not be included because ad hoc, author-generated outcome measures were used. Excluding those measures in neuropsychological batteries, 38 unique outcome measures were used. The Wechsler Intelligence Scales, Pediatric Stroke Outcome Measure, and Bayley Scales of Infant Development were among the most used, but 79% of outcome measures were used by no more than 2 studies. Although many measures used have been validated for use in children with other medical conditions or for adults with stroke, only 1 measure has been specifically validated for use in pediatric ischemic stroke. To maximize comparability of future clinical trial results, agreement regarding a preferred pediatric stroke outcome scale or battery of measures is paramount; these measures should be reliable, responsive to change, and specifically validated for use in children with stroke.
| S-EPMC3397390 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportancePatient-reported outcome (PRO) measures address the need for patient-centered data and are now used in diverse clinical, research, and policy pursuits. They are important in conditions causing upper airway-related dyspnea in which the patient's reported experience and physiological data can be discrepant.ObjectivesTo perform a systematic review of the literature on upper airway dyspnea-related PRO measures and to rigorously evaluate each measure's developmental properties, validation, and applicability.Evidence reviewThis study strictly adhered to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. MEDLINE via the PubMed interface, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and the Health and Psychosocial Instruments (HaPI) database were searched using relevant vocabulary terms and key terms related to PRO measures and upper airway-related dyspnea. Three investigators performed abstract review, and 2 investigators independently performed full-text review by applying an established checklist to evaluate the conceptual model, content validity, reliability, construct validity, scoring and interpretability, and respondent burden and presentation of each identified instrument. The initial literature search was conducted in November 2014 and was updated in April 2016.FindingsOf 1269 studies reviewed, 3 upper airway-related dyspnea PRO measures met criteria for inclusion. One PRO measure was designed de novo to assess upper airway-related dyspnea symptoms and monitor treatment outcomes, while 2 were adapted from established instruments designed for lower airway disease. Measurement properties and psychometric characteristics differed, and none met all checklist criteria. Two met a criterion in each of 7 domains evaluated. Two demonstrated test-retest and internal consistency reliability, and 2 showed that their scores were responsive to change. Thematic deficiencies in current upper airway-related dyspnea PRO measures are lack of patient involvement in item development (content validity), plan for interpretation, and literacy level assessments.Conclusions and relevancePRO measures are critical in the assessment of patients with upper airway-related dyspnea. Three instruments with disparate developmental rigor have been designed or adapted to assess this construct. Care must be taken to understand the measurement characteristics and contextual relevance before applying these PRO measures for clinical, research, or quality initiatives.
| S-EPMC5604091 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundUpper extremity (UE) impairment affects up to 80% of stroke survivors and accounts for most of the rehabilitation after discharge from the hospital release. Compensation, commonly used by stroke survivors during UE rehabilitation, is applied to adapt to the loss of motor function and may impede the rehabilitation process in the long term and lead to new orthopedic problems. Intensive monitoring of compensatory movements is critical for improving the functional outcomes during rehabilitation.ObjectiveThis review analyzes how technology-based methods have been applied to assess and detect compensation during stroke UE rehabilitation.MethodsWe conducted a wide database search. All studies were independently screened by 2 reviewers (XW and YF), with a third reviewer (BY) involved in resolving discrepancies. The final included studies were rated according to their level of clinical evidence based on their correlation with clinical scales (with the same tasks or the same evaluation criteria). One reviewer (XW) extracted data on publication, demographic information, compensation types, sensors used for compensation assessment, compensation measurements, and statistical or artificial intelligence methods. Accuracy was checked by another reviewer (YF). Four research questions were presented. For each question, the data were synthesized and tabulated, and a descriptive summary of the findings was provided. The data were synthesized and tabulated based on each research question.ResultsA total of 72 studies were included in this review. In all, 2 types of compensation were identified: disuse of the affected upper limb and awkward use of the affected upper limb to adjust for limited strength, mobility, and motor control. Various models and quantitative measurements have been proposed to characterize compensation. Body-worn technology (25/72, 35% studies) was the most used sensor technology to assess compensation, followed by marker-based motion capture system (24/72, 33% studies) and marker-free vision sensor technology (16/72, 22% studies). Most studies (56/72, 78% studies) used statistical methods for compensation assessment, whereas heterogeneous machine learning algorithms (15/72, 21% studies) were also applied for automatic detection of compensatory movements and postures.ConclusionsThis systematic review provides insights for future research on technology-based compensation assessment and detection in stroke UE rehabilitation. Technology-based compensation assessment and detection have the capacity to augment rehabilitation independent of the constant care of therapists. The drawbacks of each sensor in compensation assessment and detection are discussed, and future research could focus on methods to overcome these disadvantages. It is advised that open data together with multilabel classification algorithms or deep learning algorithms could benefit from automatic real time compensation detection. It is also recommended that technology-based compensation predictions be explored.
| S-EPMC9237771 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundOutcomes after traumatic major lower extremity amputation (MLEA) have focused on surgical complications, despite the life-altering impact on patients. With advances in the surgical management of MLEA, a heightened need for consistent reporting of patient-centered outcomes (PCO) remains. This meta-analysis assesses articles for the prevalence and methods of PCO reporting among traumatic MLEA studies.MethodsAn electronic database search was completed using Ovid MEDLINE for studies published between 2000 and 2020. Studies were included that reported any outcome of traumatic MLEA. Weighted means of outcomes were calculated when data were available. The prevalence of PCO was assessed in the categories of physical function, quality of life (QOL), psychosocial, and pain. Trends in PCO reporting were analyzed using Pearson's chi-squared test and analysis of variance when appropriate.ResultsIn total, 7001 studies were screened, yielding 156 articles for inclusion. PCO were evaluated in 94 (60.3%) studies; 83 (53.2%) reported physical function and mobility outcomes, 33 (21.2%) reported QOL and satisfaction measures, 38 (24.4%) reported psychosocial data, and 43 (27.6%) reported pain outcomes. There was no change in prevalence of PCO reporting when comparing 5-year intervals between 2000 and 2020 (P = 0.557).ConclusionsOptimization of function and QOL following traumatic MLEA has become a cornerstone of surgical success; however, only 60% of studies report PCO, with no trend over the last two decades suggesting improvement. As healthcare progresses toward patient-centered care, this inconsistent means of reporting PCO calls for improved inclusion and standardization of instruments to assess function, QOL, and other patient-focused measures.
| S-EPMC8751770 | biostudies-literature
Project description:There is currently an overprescription of opioids, which may result in abuse and diversion of narcotics. The aim of this systematic review was to investigate opioid prescription practices and consumption by patients after upper extremity surgery. This review was registered a priori on Open Science Framework (osf.io/6u5ny) and adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A search strategy was performed using MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases (from their inception to October 17, 2021). Prospective studies investigating opioid consumption of patients aged 18 years or older undergoing upper extremity surgeries were included. The Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies of Interventions and Risk of Bias 2.0 tools were used for quality assessment. In total, 21 articles met the inclusion criteria, including 7 randomized controlled trials and 14 prospective cohort studies. This represented 4195 patients who underwent upper extremity surgery. Most patients took less than half of the prescribed opioids. The percentage of opioids consumed ranged from 11% to 77%. There was moderate to severe risk of bias among the included studies. This review demonstrated that there is routinely excessive opioid prescription relative to consumption after upper limb surgery. Additional randomized trials are warranted, particularly with standardized reporting of opioid consumption and assessment of patient-reported outcomes.
| S-EPMC11342701 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Stroke is one of the leading causes for disability worldwide. Motor function deficits due to stroke affect the patients' mobility, their limitation in daily life activities, their participation in society and their odds of returning to professional activities. All of these factors contribute to a low overall quality of life. Rehabilitation training is the most effective way to reduce motor impairments in stroke patients. This multiple systematic review focuses both on standard treatment methods and on innovating rehabilitation techniques used to promote upper extremity motor function in stroke patients. A total number of 5712 publications on stroke rehabilitation was systematically reviewed for relevance and quality with regards to upper extremity motor outcome. This procedure yielded 270 publications corresponding to the inclusion criteria of the systematic review. Recent technology-based interventions in stroke rehabilitation including non-invasive brain stimulation, robot-assisted training, and virtual reality immersion are addressed. Finally, a decisional tree based on evidence from the literature and characteristics of stroke patients is proposed. At present, the stroke rehabilitation field faces the challenge to tailor evidence-based treatment strategies to the needs of the individual stroke patient. Interventions can be combined in order to achieve the maximal motor function recovery for each patient. Though the efficacy of some interventions may be under debate, motor skill learning, and some new technological approaches give promising outcome prognosis in stroke motor rehabilitation.
| S-EPMC5020059 | biostudies-other
Project description:PurposeThe use of the Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire and its shortened version, the QuickDASH, have been used to assess upper extremity function following a transradial percutaneous coronary intervention (TR-PCI). However, the use of these scores has not yet been validated for TR-PCI induced complications in the upper extremity. The aim of this study was to establish the validity of the DASH and the QuickDASH, for the assessment of upper extremity dysfunction following a transradial percutaneous coronary intervention (TR-PCI).Patients and methodsThis study was a diagnostic retrospective analysis of the ARCUS study, of whom 440 underwent TR-PCI and 62 control patients were treated via the transfemoral approach. All participants completed the DASH and QuickDASH questionnaire prior to the procedure and at each follow-up visit up to six months of follow-up. Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) were constructed to determine the validity of the questionnaires, using physical examinations to determine the occurrence of upper extremity dysfunction, according to the ARCUS study.ResultsAt each follow-up moment, the area under the curve (AUC) showed a poor ability of the DASH and QuickDASH to discriminate between patients with and without upper extremity dysfunction (AUC: 0.565-0.586). There was no significant difference between the questionnaires (p > 0.05).ConclusionThe DASH and QuickDASH questionnaires are both equally incapable of discriminating between patients with and without upper extremity dysfunction following a TR-PCI. Study results suggest that the DASH and QuickDASH questionnaires are incapable of discerning changes in upper extremity function as a result of procedural complications following a TR-PCI vs cardiac induced activity cessation.
| S-EPMC9249092 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPatients who receive workers' compensation often display worse surgical results, such as prolonged pain or reduced functional ability. The outcomes of surgery can be assessed using a variety of surveys, assessments, and measurements. It is unknown whether the confounding effect differs based on how results are measured. The aim of this study was to determine whether these variations exist.MethodsA search of full-length articles published between January 1, 1995, and December 31, 2015, was conducted using 3 online databases. The authors performed a systematic review and meta-analysis using unique inclusion criteria for each.ResultsA total of 101 articles were included in the systematic review; 62 of them were retained for the meta-analysis. In the systematic review, 70 percent of studies found that patients receiving workers' compensation had significantly worse postoperative results than uncompensated patients, whereas only 42 percent of studies that measured preoperative versus postoperative improvement were influenced by workers' compensation. The meta-analysis found that uncompensated patients were more likely to experience improvement after surgery than patients receiving workers' compensation (summary OR, 3.17; 95 percent CI, 2.47 to 4.08). A subgroup analysis demonstrated that functional measures, such as grip strength or nonunion, were least affected by workers' compensation, compared with other outcome measures such as patient-reported outcomes questionnaires or time off work.ConclusionPotential bias introduced by workers' compensation can be mitigated by evaluating surgical treatment of work-related upper extremity disorders using preoperative versus postoperative improvement or functional measures.
| S-EPMC5373484 | biostudies-literature