Early rehabilitation management after stroke: What do stroke patients prefer?

Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine

Volumn 43, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 354-358

  Laver, Kate ^a   Ratcliffe, Julie ^a   George, Stacey ^a   Lester, Laurence ^b   Walker, Ruth ^b   Burgess, Leonie ^c   Crotty, Maria ^a  

^a REPATRIATION GENERAL HOSPITAL   (Australia)

^b FLINDERS UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY SYDNEY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Patient preference; Rehabilitation programme; Stroke

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED THERAPY; COMPUTER INTERFACE; CONVALESCENCE; ECONOMICS; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HUMAN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT PREFERENCE; PHYSIOTHERAPY; QUESTIONNAIRE; STROKE; TIME;

ADULT; AGED; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT PREFERENCE; PHYSICAL THERAPY MODALITIES; PROGRAM EVALUATION; QUESTIONNAIRES; RECOVERY OF FUNCTION; STROKE; THERAPY, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; TIME FACTORS; USER-COMPUTER INTERFACE;

EID: 79953251199     PISSN: 16501977     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2340/16501977-0678     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Hopman W, Verner J. Quality of life during and after inpatient stroke rehabilitation. Stroke 2003; 34: 801-805. (Pubitemid 36307416)
2. Stroke unit Trialists' Collaboration. organised inpatient (stroke unit) care for stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007; (4) CD000197.
3. Kwakkel G. Impact of intensity of practice after stroke: issues for consideration. Disabil Rehabil 2006; 28: 823-830.
4. Laver K, George S, Thomas S, Deutsch J, Crotty M. Virtual reality for stroke rehabilitation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010; (2) CD008349.
5. Lo A, Guarino P, Richards L, Haselkorn J, Wittenberg G, Federman D, et al. Robot-assisted therapy for long term upper-limb impairment after stroke. N Engl J Med 2010; 362: 1772-1783.
6. National health and hospitals Reform Commission. Principles for Australia's health system. 2010 [cited 2010 21 June]. Available from: http://www.health.gov.au/internet/nhhrc/publishing.nsf/Content/principles-lp.
7. National health Service. NhS core principles. 2010 [cited 2010 21 June]. Available from: http://www.nhs.uk/NhSEngland/thenhs/about/Pages/ nhscoreprinciples.aspx.
8. Crawford M, Rutter D, Manley C, Weaver T, Bhui K, Fulop N, et al. Systematic review of involving patients in the planning and development of health care. br Med J 2002; 325 (1263).
9. Cumberland Consensus Working group, Cheeran B, Cohen L, Dobkin B, Ford G, Greenwood R, et al. The future of restorative neurosciences in stroke: driving the translational research pipeline from basic science to rehabilitation of people after stroke. Neu-rorehabil Neural Repair 2009; 23: 97-107.
10. Chest heart and Stroke Scotland - Scottish Association of health Councils. Improving stroke services: patients' and carers' views. glasgow: Scottish Association of health Councils; 2001.
11. Reker D, Duncan P, Horner R, Hoenig H, Samsa G, Hamilton B, et al. Postacute stroke guideline compliance is associated with greater patient satisfaction. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2002; 83: 750-756. (Pubitemid 34721472)
12. Ford R, Bach S, Fottler M. Methods of measuring patient satisfaction in health care organizations. health Care Manage Rev 1997; 22: 74-89. (Pubitemid 127455630)
13. Pound P, Gompertz P, Ebrahim S. Patients' satisfaction with stroke services. Clin Rehabil 1994; 8: 7-17. (Pubitemid 24083932)
14. Tyson S, Turner G. The process of stroke rehabilitation: what happens and why. Clin Rehabil 1999; 13: 322-332. (Pubitemid 29371562)
15. Scott A, Smith R. Keeping the customer satisfied: issues in the interpretation and use of patient satisfaction surveys. Int J Qual health Care 1994; 6: 353-359.
16. Wittink D, Vriens M, Burhenne W. Commercial use of conjoint analysis in Europe: Results and critical reflections. Int J Res Mark 1994; 11: 41-52.
17. Ryan M, Farrar S. using conjoint analysis to elicit preferences for health care. br Med J 1999; 320: 1530-1533.
18. Ryan M, gerard k, Amaya-Amaya M. using discrete choice experiments to value health and health care. bateman I, ed. Dor-drecht: Springer; 2008.
19. Scottish Intercollegiate guidelines Network. Management of patients with stroke. Edinburgh: Scottish Association of health Councils; 2002.
20. Canadian Stroke Network and the heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada: Canadian Stroke Strategy. Canadian best practice recommendations for stroke care. ottawa: Canadian Association of health Councils; 2006.
21. National Stroke Foundation. Clinical guidelines for stroke management 2010. Melbourne: National Association of health Councils; 2010.
22. South Australia Department of health Statewide Service Strategy Division. South Australian Stroke Service Plan 2009-2016. SA health, Adelaide: government of South Australia; 2009.
23. Louviere J, Islam T, Wasi N, Street D, Burgess L. Designing discrete choice experiments: do optimal designs come at a price? J Consum Res 2008; 35: 360-375.
24. Burgess L, Street D. optimal designs for choice experiments with asymmetric attributes. J Stat Plan Inference 2005; 134: 288-301. (Pubitemid 40771563)
25. Folstein M, Folstein S, Mchugh P. Mini mental state, 'A practical guide for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician'. J Psychiatr Res 1975; 12: 189-198.
26. Szende A, Williams A, ed. Measuring self reported health: an international perspective based on EQ-5D. hungary: Springmed Publishing; 2004.
27. Coast J, Flynn T, Natarajan L, Sproston K, Lewis J, Louviere J, et al. Valuing the ICECAP capability index for older people. Soc Sci Med 2008; 67: 874-882.
28. Lanscar E, Louviere J. Conducting discrete choice experiments to inform healthcare decision making: a user's guide. Pharmacoeco-nomics 2008; 26: 661-677.
29. Morris R, Payne O, Lambert A. Patient, carer and staff experience of a hospital-based stroke service. Int J Qual health Care 2007; 19: 105-112.
30. Ratcliffe J, Laver K, Couzner L, Cameron I, Gray L, Crotty M. Not just about costs: the role of health economics in facilitating decision making in aged care. Age Ageing 2010; 39: 426-429.