Interdisciplinary Comprehensive Arm Rehabilitation Evaluation (ICARE): A randomized controlled trial protocol

BMC Neurology

Volumn 13, Issue , 2013, Pages

  Winstein, Carolee J ^a,b   Wolf, Steven L ^c   Dromerick, Alexander W ^d,e,f   Lane, Christianne J ^b   Nelsen, Monica A ^a   Lewthwaite, Rebecca ^a   Blanton, Sarah ^c   Scott, Charro ^g   Reiss, Aimee ^c   Cen, Steven Yong ^a,b   Holley, Rahsaan ^d   Azen, Stanley P ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c EMORY UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^d NATIONAL REHABILITATION HOSPITAL   (United States)

^e GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^f VETERANS AFFAIRS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^g LONG BEACH MEMORIAL MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Brain infarction; Hemiparesis; Motor recovery; Neurorehabilitation; Occupational therapy; Physical therapy; Stroke; Task specific training

Indexed keywords

ACCELERATED SKILL ACQUISITION PROGRAM; ADULT; ARM INJURY; ARTICLE; BRAIN HEMORRHAGE; BRAIN ISCHEMIA; CEREBROVASCULAR ACCIDENT; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT TOOL; CONTROLLED STUDY; CONVALESCENCE; CUSTOMARY THERAPY OF AN EQUIVALENT DOSE; DISEASE DURATION; DISEASE SEVERITY; HUMAN; INTERDISCIPLINARY COMPREHENSIVE ARM REHABILITATION EVALUATION; MOTOR PERFORMANCE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; OUTPATIENT; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; REHABILITATION CARE; SCORING SYSTEM; STROKE IMPACT SCALE; UNITED STATES; USUAL AND CUSTOMARY THERAPY; WOLF MOTOR FUNCTION TEST;

ADULT; ARM; DISABILITY EVALUATION; EXERCISE THERAPY; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; MALE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); SINGLE-BLIND METHOD; STROKE; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 84872124350     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14712377     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2377-13-5     Document Type: Article

References (92)

1. Mayo NE, Wood-Dauphinee S, Cote R, Durcan L, Carlton J. Activity, participation, and quality of life 6 months poststroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2002, 83(8):1035-1042. 10.1053/apmr.2002.33984, 12161823.
2. Dobkin BH. Clinical practice. Rehabilitation after stroke. N Engl J Med 2005, 352(16):1677-1684. 10.1056/NEJMcp043511, 15843670.
3. Duncan PW, Bode RK, Min Lai S, Perera S. Rasch analysis of a new stroke-specific outcome scale: the stroke impact scale. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2003, 84(7):950-963. 10.1016/S0003-9993(03)00035-2, 12881816.
4. Gresham GE, Duncan PW, Stason WB, Adams HP, Adelman AM, Alexander DN, Bishop DS, Diller L, Donaldson NE, Granger CV, et al. Post-Stroke Rehabilitation 1995, Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
5. Lai SM, Studenski S, Duncan PW, Perera S. Persisting consequences of stroke measured by the stroke impact scale. Stroke 2002, 33(7):1840-1844. 10.1161/01.STR.0000019289.15440.F2, 12105363.
6. Broeks JG, Lankhorst GJ, Rumping K, Prevo AJ. The long-term outcome of arm function after stroke: results of a follow-up study. Disabil Rehabil 1999, 21(8):357-364. 10.1080/096382899297459, 10503976.
7. Mayo N. Activity, participation, and quality of life 6 months poststroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2002, 83(8):1035-1042. 10.1053/apmr.2002.33984, 12161823.
8. Jonsson AC, Lindgren I, Hallstrom B, Norrving B, Lindgren A. Determinants of quality of life in stroke survivors and their informal caregivers. Stroke 2005, 36(4):803-808. 10.1161/01.STR.0000160873.32791.20, 15761203.
9. Suenkeler IH, Nowak M, Misselwitz B, Kugler C, Schreiber W, Oertel WH, Back T. Timecourse of health-related quality of life as determined 3, 6 and 12 months after stroke. Relationship to neurological deficit, disability and depression. J Neurol 2002, 249(9):1160-1167. 10.1007/s00415-002-0792-3, 12242533.
10. Mahoney FI, Barthel DW. Functional evaluation: the barthel index. Md State Med J 1965, 14:61-65.
11. Duncan PW, Jorgensen HS, Wade DT. Outcome measures in acute stroke trials: a systematic review and some recommendations to improve practice. Stroke 2000, 31(6):1429-1438. 10.1161/01.STR.31.6.1429, 10835468.
12. Winstein CJ. Why is functional independence (FIM) used to identify rehabilitation needs in stroke survivors?. Physiother Res Int 2004, 9(4):182-184. 10.1002/pri.322, 15790256.
13. Dromerick AW, Edwards DF, Diringer MN. Sensitivity to changes in disability after stroke: a comparison of four scales useful in clinical trials. J Rehabil Res Dev 2003, 40(1):1-8. 10.1682/JRRD.2003.01.0001, 15150715.
14. Kwon S, Hartzema AG, Duncan PW, Min-Lai S. Disability measures in stroke: relationship among the barthel index, the functional independence measure, and the modified rankin scale. Stroke 2004, 35(4):918-923. 10.1161/01.STR.0000119385.56094.32, 14976324.
15. Duncan PW, Wallace D, Studenski S, Lai SM, Johnson D. Conceptualization of a new stroke-specific outcome measure: the stroke impact scale. Top Stroke Rehabil 2001, 8(2):19-33. 10.1310/BRHX-PKTA-0TUJ-UYWT, 14523743.
16. Wolf SL, Winstein CJ, Miller JP, Taub E, Uswatte G, Morris D, Giuliani C, Light KE, Nichols-Larsen D. Effect of constraint-induced movement therapy on upper extremity function 3 to 9 months after stroke: the EXCITE randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2006, 296(17):2095-2104. 10.1001/jama.296.17.2095, 17077374.
17. Weinrich M, Stuart M, Hoyer T. Rules for rehabilitation: an agenda for research. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2005, 19(2):72-83. 10.1177/1545968305275718, 15883352.
18. van der Lee JH. Constraint-induced therapy for stroke: more of the same or something completely different?. Curr Opin Neurol 2001, 14(6):741-744. 10.1097/00019052-200112000-00010, 11723382.
19. Dobkin BH. Strategies for stroke rehabilitation. Lancet Neurol 2004, 3(9):528-536. 10.1016/S1474-4422(04)00851-8, 15324721.
20. Bayona NA, Bitensky J, Salter K, Teasell R. The role of task-specific training in rehabilitation therapies. Top Stroke Rehabil 2005, 12(3):58-65. 10.1310/BQM5-6YGB-MVJ5-WVCR, 16110428.
21. Turton A, Pomeroy V. When should upper limb function be trained after stroke? evidence for and against early intervention. Neuro Rehabilitation 2002, 17(3):215-224.
22. Paolucci S, Antonucci G, Grasso MG, Morelli D, Troisi E, Coiro P, Bragoni M. Early versus delayed inpatient stroke rehabilitation: a matched comparison conducted in italy. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2000, 81(6):695-700.
23. Kleim J, Jones T. Principles of experience-dependent neural plasticity: implications for rehabilitation after brain damage. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2008, 51(1):S225-S239. 10.1044/1092-4388(2008/018), 18230848.
24. Winstein CJ, Prettyman M. Constraint-induced therapy for functional recovery after brain injury: unraveling the key ingredients and mechanisms. Synaptic Plasticity. edn 2005, 281-328. New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc, Baudry M, Bi X, Schrieber S.
25. Dromerick AW, Lang CE, Birkenmeier RL, Wagner JM, Sahrmann SA, Miller JP, Videen TO, Powers WJ, Wolf SL, Edwards DF. Very early constraint induced movement therapy during stroke rehabilitation (VECTORS): a single-center RCT. Neurology 2009, 73(3):195-201. 10.1212/WNL.0b013e3181ab2b27, 2715572, 19458319.
26. Noren-Muller A, Reis-Correa I, Prinz H, Rosenbaum C, Saxena K, Schwalbe HJ, Vestweber D, Cagna G, Schunk S, Schwarz O, et al. Discovery of protein phosphatase inhibitor classes by biology-oriented synthesis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2006, 103(28):10606-10611. 10.1073/pnas.0601490103, 1502279, 16809424.
27. Lang CE, Wagner JM, Edwards DF, Dromerick AW. Upper extremity Use in people with hemiparesis in the first Few weeks after stroke. J Neurol Phys Ther 2007, 31(2):56-63.
28. Higgins J, Salbach NM, Wood-Dauphinee S, Richards CL, Cote R, Mayo NE. The effect of a task-oriented intervention on arm function in people with stroke: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Rehabil 2006, 20(4):296-310. 10.1191/0269215505cr943oa, 16719028.
29. Bombardier C, Maetzel A. Pharmacoeconomic evaluation of new treatments: efficacy versus effectiveness studies?. Ann Rheum Dis 1999, 58(Suppl 1):I82-I85. 1766572, 10577979.
30. Langhammer B, Stanghelle JK. Bobath or motor relearning programme? a comparison of two different approaches of physiotherapy in stroke rehabilitation: a randomized controlled study. Clin Rehabil 2000, 14(4):361-369. 10.1191/0269215500cr338oa, 10945420.
31. Lo AC RL, Wittenberg GF. Robot-assisted therapy for long term upper limb impairment after stroke. N Engl J Med 2010, 362(19):1772-1783. Erratum in N Engl J Med 2011, 365(18):1749, 10.1056/NEJMoa0911341, 20400552.
32. Brott T, Adams HP, Olinger CP, Marler JR, Barsan WG, Biller J, Spilker J, Holleran R, Eberle R, Hertzberg V, et al. Measurements of acute cerebral infarction: a clinical examination scale. Stroke 1989, 20(7):864-870. 10.1161/01.STR.20.7.864, 2749846.
33. Weintraub S, Mesulam MM. Mental state assessment of young and elderly adults in behavioral neurology 1985, Philadelphia: Davis Company.
34. Borson S, Scanlan J, Brush M, Vitaliano P, Dokmak A. The mini-Cog: a cognitive 'vital signs' measure for dementia screening in multi-lingual elderly. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 2000, 15(11):1021-1027. 10.1002/1099-1166(200011)15:11<1021::AID-GPS234>3.0.CO;2-6, 11113982.
35. Agrell B, Dehun O. The clock-drawing test. Age Ageing 1998, 27:399-403.
36. World Health Organization International classification of functioning, disability and health 2001, Geneva: World Health Organization, World Health Organization.
37. Spitzer RL, Kroenke K, Williams JB. Validation and utility of a self-report version of PRIME-MD: the PHQ primary care study. Primary care evaluation of mental disorders. Patient health questionnaire. JAMA 1999, 282(18):1737-1744. 10.1001/jama.282.18.1737, 10568646.
38. Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JB. The PHQ-9: validity of a brief depression severity measure. J Gen Intern Med 2001, 16(9):606-613. 10.1046/j.1525-1497.2001.016009606.x, 1495268, 11556941.
39. Appelros P, Terent A. Characteristics of the national institute of health stroke scale: results from a population-based stroke cohort at baseline and after one year. Cerebrovasc Dis 2004, 17(1):21-27. 10.1159/000073894, 14530634.
40. Goldstein LB, Bertels C, Davis JN. Interrater reliability of the NIH stroke scale. Arch Neurol 1989, 46(6):660-662. 10.1001/archneur.1989.00520420080026, 2730378.
41. Wityk RJ, Pessin MS, Kaplan RF, Caplan LR. Serial assessment of acute stroke using the NIH stroke scale. Stroke 1994, 25(2):362-365. 10.1161/01.STR.25.2.362, 8303746.
42. Fritz SL, Blanton S, Uswatte G, Taub E, Wolf SL. Minimal detectable change scores for the wolf motor function test. Neurorehab Neural Re 2009, 23(7):662-667.
43. Wolf SL, Thompson PA, Morris DM, Rose DK, Winstein CJ, Taub E, Giuliani C, Pearson SL. The EXCITE trial: attributes of the wolf motor function test in patients with subacute stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2005, 19(3):194-205. 10.1177/1545968305276663, 16093410.
44. Morris JC, Heyman A, Mohs RC, Hughes JP, van Belle G, Fillenbaum G, Mellits ED, Clark C. The consortium to establish a registry for Alzheimer's disease (CERAD). part I. Clinical and neuropsychological assessment of Alzheimer's disease. Neurology 1989, 39(9):1159-1165. 10.1212/WNL.39.9.1159, 2771064.
45. Delis DC, Kaplan E, Kramer JH. The Delis-Kaplan executive function system 2001, San Antonio: The Psychological Corporation.
46. Brandt J, Benedict RHB. Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised 2001, Lutz, FL: PAR Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc, http://www4.parinc.com/.
47. U.S. Army Army Individual Test Battery. Manual of Directions and Scoring 1944, Washington DC: Adjutant General's Office, Department W, U.S. Army.
48. Reitan R, Wolfson D. The Halstead-Reitan neuropsychological test battery: theory and clinical interpretation 2nd edition 1993, Tuscon, AZ: Neuropsychology Press.
49. Fugl-Meyer AR, Jaasko L, Leyman I, Olsson S, Steglind S. The post-stroke hemiplegic patient. 1. A method for evaluation of physical performance. Scand J Rehabil Med 1975, 7(1):13-31.
50. Gladstone DJ, Danells CJ, Armesto A, McIlroy WE, Staines WR, Graham SJ, Herrmann N, Szalai JP, Black SE. Physiotherapy coupled with dextroamphetamine for rehabilitation after hemiparetic stroke: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Stroke 2006, 37(1):179-185.
51. Diener E, Emmons RA, Larsen RJ, Griffin S. The satisfaction with life scale. J Pers Assess 1985, 49(1):71-75. 10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13, 16367493.
52. Arrindell WA, Meeuwesen L, Huyse FJ. The satisfaction with life scale (SWLS): psychometric properties in a non-psychiatric medical outpatients sample. Pers Individ Dif 1991, 12(2):117-123.
53. Pavot W, Diener E. Review of the satifaction with life scale. Psychol Assess 1993, 5(2):164-172.
54. Andrews AW, Thomas MW, Bohannon RW. Normative values for isometric muscle force measurements obtained with hand-held dynamometers. Phys Ther 1996, 76(3):248-259.
55. Miller KJ, Phillips BA, Martin CL, Wheat HE, Goodwin AW, Galea MP. The AsTex®: clinimetric properties of a new tool for evaluating hand sensation following stroke. Clin Rehabil 2009, 23:1104-1115. 10.1177/0269215509342331, 19897517.
56. Uswatte G, Taub E, Morris D, Light K, Thompson PA. The motor activity Log-28: assessing daily use of the hemiparetic arm after stroke. Neurology 2006, 67(7):1189-1194. 10.1212/01.wnl.0000238164.90657.c2, 17030751.
57. EuroQol Group EuroQol-a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy 1990, 16:199-208. http://www.euroqol.org/euroqol-group, EuroQol Group.
58. Stark SL, Edwards DF, Hollingsworth H, Gray DB. Validation of the reintegration to normal living index in a population of community-dwelling people with mobility limitations. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2005, 86(2):344-345. 10.1016/j.apmr.2004.03.020, 15706566.
59. Daneski K, Coshall C, Tilling K, Wolfe CD. Reliability and validity of a postal version of the reintegration to normal living index, modified for use with stroke patients. Clin Rehabil 2003, 17(8):835-839. 10.1191/0269215503cr686oa, 14682554.
60. Kemp BJ, Ettelson D. Quality of life while living and aging with a spinal cord injury and other impairments. Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil 2001, 6(3):116-127.
61. Kemp BJ, Mosqueda L. Aging with a disability: What the clinician needs to know 2004, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
62. Wolf SL, Lecraw DE, Barton LA, Jann BB. Forced use of hemiplegic upper extremities to reverse the effect of learned nonuse among chronic stroke and head-injured patients. Exp Neurol 1989, 104(2):125-132. 10.1016/S0014-4886(89)80005-6, 2707361.
63. Wolf SLCP, Ellis M, et al. Assessing wolf motor function test outcome measure for research in patients with stroke. Am Stroke Assoc 2001, 32:1635-1639.
64. Morris D. The reliability of the wolf motor function test for assessing upper extremity function after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2001, 82(6):750-755. 10.1053/apmr.2001.23183, 11387578.
65. Wolf SL, Catlin PA, Ellis M, Archer AL, Morgan B, Piacentino A. Assessing wolf motor function test as outcome measure for research in patients after stroke. Stroke 2001, 32(7):1635-1639. 10.1161/01.STR.32.7.1635, 11441212.
66. Duncan PW, Wallace D, Lai SM, Johnson D, Embretson S, Laster LJ. The stroke impact scale version 2.0. Evaluation of reliability, validity, and sensitivity to change. Stroke 1999, 30(10):2131-2140. 10.1161/01.STR.30.10.2131, 10512918.
67. Lai SM, Perera S, Duncan PW, Bode R. Physical and social functioning after stroke: comparison of the stroke impact scale and short form-36. Stroke 2003, 34(2):488-493. 10.1161/01.STR.0000054162.94998.C0, 12574565.
68. Bellg AJ, Borrelli B, Resnick B, Hecht J, Minicucci DS, Ory M, Ogedegbe G, Orwig D, Ernst D, Czajkowski S. Enhancing treatment fidelity in health behavior change studies: best practices and recommendations from the NIH behavior change consortium. Health Psychol 2004, 23(5):443-451.
69. Gladstone JDDC, Black SE. The fugl-meyer assessment of motor recovery after stroke: a critial review of its measurement properties. Am Soc Neurorehabil 2002, 16:232-240.
70. Sanford J, Moreland J, Swanson LR, Stratford PW, Gowland C. Reliability of the fugl-meyer assessment for testing motor performance in patients following stroke. Phys Ther 1993, 73(7):447-454.
71. Barreca S, Wolf SL, Fasoli S, Bohannon R. Treatment interventions for the paretic upper limb of stroke survivors: a critical review. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2003, 17(4):220-226. 10.1177/0888439003259415, 14677218.
72. Van Peppen RP, Kwakkel G, Wood-Dauphinee S, Hendriks HJ, Van der Wees PJ, Dekker J. The impact of physical therapy on functional outcomes after stroke: what's the evidence?. Clin Rehabil 2004, 18(8):833-862. 10.1191/0269215504cr843oa, 15609840.
73. Kwakkel G, Kollen BJ, Wagenaar RC. Long term effects of intensity of upper and lower limb training after stroke: a randomised trial. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2002, 72(4):473-479. 1737834, 11909906.
74. Kwakkel G, Wagenaar RC, Twisk JW, Lankhorst GJ, Koetsier JC. Intensity of leg and arm training after primary middle-cerebral-artery stroke: a randomised trial. Lancet 1999, 354(9174):191-196. 10.1016/S0140-6736(98)09477-X, 10421300.
75. Lee TD, Swinnen SP, Serrien DJ. Cognitive effort and motor learning. Quest 1994, 46:328-344.
76. Guadagnoli MA, Lee TD. Challenge point: a framework for conceptualizing the effects of various practice conditions in motor learning. J Mot Behav 2004, 36(2):212-224. 10.3200/JMBR.36.2.212-224, 15130871.
77. Platz T. Impairment-oriented training (IOT)-scientific concept and evidence-based treatment strategies. Restor Neurol Neurosci 2004, 22(3-5):301-315.
78. Platz T, Bock S, Prass K. Reduced skilfulness of arm motor behaviour among motor stroke patients with good clinical recovery: does it indicate reduced automaticity? Can it be improved by unilateral or bilateral training? a kinematic motion analysis study. Neuropsychologia 2001, 39(7):687-698. 10.1016/S0028-3932(01)00005-7, 11311299.
79. Platz T, van Kaick S, Moller L, Freund S, Winter T, Kim IH. Impairment-oriented training and adaptive motor cortex reorganisation after stroke: a fTMS study. J Neurol 2005, 252(11):1363-1371. 10.1007/s00415-005-0868-y, 15965585.
80. Sunderland A, Tuke A. Neuroplasticity, learning and recovery after stroke: a critical evaluation of constraint-induced therapy. Neuropsychol Rehabil 2005, 15(2):81-96. 10.1080/09602010443000047, 16353503.
81. Page SJ. Intensity versus task-specificity after stroke: how important is intensity?. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2003, 82(9):730-732. 10.1097/01.PHM.0000078226.36000.A5, 12960917.
82. Keetch KM, Schmidt RA, Lee TD, Young DE. Especial skills: their emergence with massive amounts of practice. J Exp Psychol 2005, 31(5):970-978.
83. Wu CY, Trombly CA, Lin KC, Tickle-Degnen L. A kinematic study of contextual effects on reaching performance in persons with and without stroke: influences of object availability. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2000, 81(1):95-101.
84. Wulf G, Prinz W. Directing attention to movement effects enhances learning: a review. Psychon Bull Rev 2001, 8(4):648-660. 10.3758/BF03196201, 11848583.
85. Schmidt R, Young DE. Transfer of movement control in motor skill learning. Transfer of Learning. edn 1987, 47-79. Fl: Academic Press, Inc, Cormier SM, Orlando JH.
86. Wulf G. Self-controlled practice enhances motor learning: implications for physical therapy. Physiotherapy 2007, 93:96-101.
87. Watson G. Neuromusculoskeletal physiotherapy: encouraging self-management. Physiotherapy 1996, 82(6):352-357.
88. Lee TD WL. Motor learning conundrums. Quest 2005, 57.
89. Barker RN, Brauer SG. Upper limb recovery after stroke: the stroke survivors' perspective. Disabil Rehabil 2005, 27(20):1213-1223. 10.1080/09638280500075717, 16298923.
90. Bandura A. Self-efficacy: the exercise of control 1997, New York: Freeman.
91. Hellstrom K, Lindmark B, Wahlberg B, Fugl-Meyer AR. Self-efficacy in relation to impairments and activities of daily living disability in elderly patients with stroke: a prospective investigation. J Rehabil Med 2003, 35(5):202-207. 10.1080/16501970310000836, 14582550.
92. Brien PC, Fleming TR. A multiple testing procedure for clinical trials. Biometrics 1979, 35:549-556. 10.2307/2530245, 497341.