Corrigendum to: A Randomized Controlled Evaluation of the Efficacy of an Ankle-Foot Cast on Walking Recovery Early After Stroke: SWIFT Cast Trial (Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair, (2016), 30, 1, (40-48), 10.1177/1545968315583724);A Randomized Controlled Evaluation of the Efficacy of an Ankle-Foot Cast on Walking Recovery Early after Stroke: SWIFT Cast Trial

Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair

Volumn 30, Issue 1, 2016, Pages 40-48

  Pomeroy, Valerie M ^a,f   Rowe, Philip ^b   Clark, A L L A N ^a   Walker, Andrew ^a,c   Kerr, Andrew ^b   Chandler, Elizabeth ^a   Barber, M A R K ^d   Baron, Jean Claude ^e  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EAST ANGLIA   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF STRATHCLYDE   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

^d NHS LANARKSHIRE   (United Kingdom)

^e INSERM   (France)

^f UNIVERSITY OF EAST ANGLIA   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

orthotics; physical therapy; rehabilitation; stroke; walking

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ANKLE FOOT CAST; ANKLE FOOT ORTHOSIS; ARTICLE; CAST APPLICATION; CEREBROVASCULAR ACCIDENT; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; CLINICAL EVALUATION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED STUDY; CONVALESCENCE; FACES PAIN SCALE; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; ORTHOPEDIC CAST; PHASE 2 CLINICAL TRIAL; PHYSIOTHERAPY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; REHABILITATION CARE; TREATMENT DURATION; TREATMENT OUTCOME; TREATMENT RESPONSE; WALKING SPEED; ANKLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; FOOT; KINESIOTHERAPY; PLASTER CAST; STROKE REHABILITATION; TIME FACTOR; WALKING;

AGED; ANKLE; CASTS, SURGICAL; EXERCISE THERAPY; FOOT; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; RECOVERY OF FUNCTION; STROKE REHABILITATION; TIME FACTORS; TREATMENT OUTCOME; WALKING;

EID: 84949870327     PISSN: 15459683     EISSN: 15526844     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1545968319896700     Document Type: Erratum

References (20)

1. Baer G, Smith M,. The recovery of walking ability and subclassification of stroke. Physiother Res Int. 2001; 6: 135-144.
2. Pollock A, St George B, Fenton M, Firkins L,. Top ten research priorities relating to life after stroke. Lancet Neurol. 2012; 11: 209.
3. Royal College of Physicians. National Clinical Guideline for Stroke. 4th ed. London, UK: Royal College of Physicians; 2012.
4. Condie E, Campbell J, Martina J, eds. Report of a consensus conference on the orthotic management of stroke patients. Copenhagen, Denmark: International Society for Prosthetics and Orthotics; 2004: ISBN 87-89809-14-9.
5. Pomeroy VM, Rowe P, Baron J-C, et al. The SWIFT Cast trial protocol: a randomized controlled evaluation of the efficacy of an ankle-foot cast on walking recovery early after stroke and the neural-biomechanical correlates of response. Int J Stroke. 2012; 7: 86-93.
6. Holden MK, Gill KM, Magliozzi MR, Nathan J, Piehl-Baker L,. Clinical gait assessment in the neurologically impaired. Phys Ther. 1984; 64: 35-40.
7. Lennon S, Johnson L,. The modified Rivermead Mobility Index: validity and reliability. Disabil Rehabil. 2000; 22: 833-839.
8. Richards JD, Pramanik A, Sykes L, Pomeroy VM,. A comparison of knee kinematic characteristics of stroke patients and age-matched healthy volunteers. Clin Rehabil. 2003; 17: 565-571.
9. Tyson SF, Selley A,. A content analysis of physiotherapy for postural control in people with stroke: an observational study. Disabil Rehabil. 2006; 28: 865-872.
10. Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network. Management of Patients With Stroke: Rehabilitation, Prevention and Management of Complications, and Discharge Planning. Edinburgh, UK: SIGN; 2010: 16.
11. Tyson SF, Kent RM,. Effects of an ankle-foot orthosis on balance and walking after stroke: a systematic review and pooled meta-analysis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2013; 94: 1377-1385.
12. Tyson SF, Rogerson L,. Assistive Walking Devices in Nonambulant Patients Undergoing Rehabilitation After Stroke: The Effects on Functional Mobility, Walking Impairments, and Patients' Opinion. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2009; 90: 475-479.
13. Cramer SC. Repairing the human brain after stroke: II. Restorative therapies. Ann Neurol. 2008; 63: 549-560.
14. Morone G, Bragoni M, Iosa M, et al. Who may benefit from robotic-assisted gait training? Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2011; 25: 636-644.
15. Slijper A, Danielsson A, Willén C,. Ambulatory function and perception of confidence in persons with stroke with a custom-made hinged versus a standard ankle foot orthosis. Rehabil Res Pract. 2012; 2012: 206495.
16. Kleim JA, Jones TA,. Principles of experience-dependent neural plasticity: implications for rehabilitation after brain damage. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2008; 51: S225-S239.
17. MacLellan CL, Keough MB, Granter-Button S, Chernenko GA, Butt S, Corbett D,. A critical threshold of rehabilitation involving brain-derived neurotrophic factor is required for poststroke recovery. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2011; 25: 740-748.
18. Cooke EV, Tallis RC, Clark A, Pomeroy VM,. Efficacy of functional strength training on restoration of lower-limb motor function early after stroke: phase I randomized controlled trial. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2010; 24: 88-96.
19. Stinear C, Ackerley S, Byblow W,. Rehabilitation is initiated early after stroke, but most motor rehabilitation trials are not: a systematic review. Stroke. 2013; 44: 2039-2045.
20. Sully BGO, Julious SA, Nicholl J,. A reinvestigation of recruitment to randomised, controlled, multicenter trials: a review of trials funded by two UK funding agencies. Trials. 2013; 14: 166.