Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2006 Dec;20(12):1038-49.
doi: 10.1177/0269215506071230.

Does a short period of rehabilitation in the home setting facilitate functioning after stroke? A randomized controlled trial

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Does a short period of rehabilitation in the home setting facilitate functioning after stroke? A randomized controlled trial

Ann Björkdahl et al. Clin Rehabil. 2006 Dec.

Erratum in

  • Clin Rehabil. 2007 Mar;21(3):287

Abstract

Objective: To assess the effect of three weeks of rehabilitation in the home setting for younger patients with stroke with the aim of improving activity level.

Design: A randomized controlled study with blinded evaluations at discharge, three weeks, three months and one year after discharge.

Setting: Home of the patient or the ordinary day rehabilitation clinic at the university hospital.

Subjects: Fifty-eight patients (median age 53 years) consecutively discharged from inpatient rehabilitation with a first occurrence of stroke participated in training directly after discharge.

Intervention: Rehabilitation was given for 9 hours/week over three weeks. The home group received individually tailored training, based on the patient's needs and desires, with a focus on activities in their natural context. Support and information were also given. The intervention in the day clinic group was aimed mainly at improved functions.

Main measures: The main outcome was activity, assessed with the Assessment of Motor and Process Skill (AMPS). The impairment level was also evaluated. Costs were estimated.

Result: There were no significant differences between the groups on any of the four assessments. However, there seemed to be an earlier improvement on some measures (including AMPS) for the home group. For both groups there was a greater improvement on the activity level than on the impairment level. the costs of the home group were less than half of the costs of the day clinic group.

Conclusion: With the present results, both rehabilitation programmes could be recommended, however, further studies are needed to define patients who may specifically benefit from the home rehabilitation programme. Costs should be taken into consideration.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources