Where to now? AVERT answered an important question, but raised many more

Can Early Neuromuscular Rehabilitation Protocol Improve Disability after a Hemiparetic Stroke? A Pilot Study

Background: The impairment of limb function and disability are among the most important consequences of stroke. To date, however, little research has been done on the early rehabilitation trial (ERT) after stroke in these patients. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of ERT neuromuscular protocol on motor function soon after hemiparetic stroke. The sample included twelve hemiparetic patients (54.3 ± 15.4 years old) with ischemic stroke (n = 7 control, n = 5 intervention patients). ERT was started as early as possible after stroke and included passive range of motion exercises, resistance training, assisted standing up, and active exercises of the healthy side of the body, in addition to encouraging voluntary contraction of affected limbs as much as possible. The rehabilitation was progressive and took 3 months, 6 days per week, 2–3 hours per session. Fugle-Meyer Assessment (FMA), Box and Blocks test (BBT) and Timed up and go (TUG) assessments were conducted. There was a significantly greater improvement in the intervention group compared to control: FMA lower limbs (p = 0.001), total motor function (p = 0.002), but no significant difference in FMA upper limb between groups (p = 0.51). The analysis of data related to BBT showed no significant differences between the experimental and control groups (p = 0.3). However, TUG test showed significant differences between the experimental and control groups (p = 0.004). The most important finding of this study was to spend enough time in training sessions and provide adequate rest time for each person. Our results showed that ERT was associated with improved motor function but not with the upper limbs. This provides a basis for a definitive trial.

Very early mobilization in the stroke unit: Functionality, quality of life and disability at 90 days and 1 year post-stroke

BACKGROUND

The evidence of early mobilization after stroke is conflicting, and the recovery period is an important concern.

OBJECTIVE

To analyse the functionality, quality of life and disability at 90 days and 1 year post-stroke of patients who received a Very Early Mobilization Protocol (VEMP).

METHODS

Prospective cohort study in a tertiary stroke unit. Consecutive patients aged≥18 years and without prior significant disability, who presented motor deficit after acute stroke, were included. A symmetry test was performed to compare the changes in the main variables: Barthel Index (BI), Functional Ambulation Category (FAC), modified Rankin Scale (mRS) and EuroQol five-dimensions three-level (EQ-5D-3L) between 90 days and 1 year post-stroke.

RESULTS

A total of 123 patients were recruited. The BI reflected an improvement at 1 year in transfer to chair/bed in 25.8%(p <  0.01) of patients and in toilet use in 25.8%(p = 0.02). The FAC showed an improvement at 1 year in 44.4%(p <  0.01) of patients and the mRS in 19.1%(p = 0.01). The usual activities dimension of the EQ-5D-3L showed a clinically relevant improvement after 1 year in 15.9%(p = 0.23) of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

A significant percentage of patients show improvements in some functional areas and in disability between 90 days and 1 year post-stroke.

Fatal and Nonfatal Events Within 14 days After Early, Intensive Mobilization Poststroke

OBJECTIVE

This tertiary analysis from A Very Early Rehabilitation Trial (AVERT) examined fatal and nonfatal serious adverse events (SAEs) at 14 days.

METHOD

AVERT was a prospective, parallel group, assessor blinded, randomized international clinical trial comparing mobility training commenced <24 hours poststroke, termed very early mobilization (VEM), to usual care (UC). Primary outcome was assessed at 3 months. Patients with ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke within 24 hours of onset were included. Treatment with thrombolytics was allowed. Patients with severe premorbid disability or comorbidities were excluded. Interventions continued for 14 days or hospital discharge if less. The primary early safety outcome was fatal SAEs within 14 days. Secondary outcomes were nonfatal SAEs classified as neurologic, immobility-related, and other. Mortality influences were assessed using binary logistic regression adjusted for baseline stroke severity (NIH Stroke Scale [NIHSS] score) and age.

RESULTS

A total of 2,104 participants were randomized to VEM (n = 1,054) or UC (n = 1,050) with a median age of 72 years (interquartile range [IQR] 63-80) and NIHSS 7 (IQR 4-12). By 14 days, 48 had died in VEM, 32 in UC, age and stroke severity adjusted odds ratio of 1.76 (95% confidence interval 1.06-2.92, p = 0.029). Stroke progression was more common in VEM. Exploratory subgroup analyses showed higher odds of death in intracerebral hemorrhage and >80 years subgroups, but there was no significant treatment by subgroup interaction. No difference in nonfatal SAEs was found.

CONCLUSION

While the overall case fatality at 14 days poststroke was only 3.8%, mortality adjusted for age and stroke severity was increased with high dose and intensive training compared to usual care. Stroke progression was more common in VEM.

REGISTRATION

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12606000185561.

CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE

This study provides Class I evidence that very early mobilization increases mortality at 14 days poststroke.

Early Mobilization After Stroke: Do Clinical Practice Guidelines Support Clinicians' Decision-Making?

Importance: Early mobilization, out-of-bed activity, is a component of acute stroke unit care; however, stroke patient heterogeneity requires complex decision-making. Clinically credible and applicable CPGs are needed to support and optimize the delivery of care. In this study, we are specifically exploring the role of clinical practice guidelines to support individual patient-level decision-making by stroke clinicians about early mobilization post-stroke. Methods: Our study uses a novel, two-pronged approach. (1) A review of CPGs containing recommendations for early mobilization practices published after 2015 was appraised using purposely selected items from the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation-Recommendations Excellence (AGREE-REX) tool relevant to decision-making for clinicians. (2) A cross-sectional study involving semi-structured interviews with Australian expert stroke clinicians representing content experts and CPG target users. Every CPG was independently assessed against the AGREE-REX standard by two reviewers. Expert stroke clinicians, invited via email, were recruited between June 2019 to March 2020.The main outcomes from the review was the proportion of criteria addressed for each AGREE-REX item by individual and all CPG(s). The main cross-sectional outcomes were the distributions of stroke clinicians' responses about the utility of CPGs, specific areas of uncertainty in early mobilization decision-making, and suggested parameters for inclusion in future early mobilization CPGs. Results: In 18 identified CPGs, many did not adequately address the "Evidence" and "Applicability to Patients" AGREE-REX items. Out of 30 expert stroke clinicians (11 physicians [37%], 11 physiotherapists [37%], 8 nurses [26%]; median [IQR] years of experience, 14 [10-25]), 47% found current CPGs "too broad or vague," while 40% rely on individual clinical judgement and interpretation of the evidence to select an evidence-based choice of action. The areas of uncertainty in decision-making revealed four key suggestions: (1) more granular descriptions of patient and stroke characteristics for appropriate tailoring of decisions, (2) clear statements about when clinical flexibility is appropriate, (3) detailed description of the intervention dose, and (4) physical assessment criteria including safety parameters. Conclusions: The lack of specificity, clinical applicability, and adaptability of current CPGs to effectively respond to the heterogeneous clinical stroke context has provided a clear direction for improvement.

Early Mobilization of Mild-Moderate Intracerebral Hemorrhage Patients in a Stroke Center: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Background. Few studies have addressed early out-of-bed mobilization specifically in acute intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) patients. Patient benefit in such cases is unclear, with early intervention timing and duration identical to those in standard care. Objective. We investigated the efficacy of an early mobilization (EM) protocol, administered within 24 to 72 hours of stroke onset, for early functional independence in mild-moderate ICH patients. Methods. Sixty patients admitted to a stroke center within 24 hours of ICH were randomly assigned to early mobilization (EM) or standard early rehabilitation (SER). The EM group underwent an early out-of-bed mobilization protocol, while the SER group underwent a standard protocol focusing on in-bed training in the stroke center. Intervention in both groups lasted 30 minutes per session, once a day, 5 days a week. Motor subscales of the Functional Independence Measure (FIM-motor; primary outcome), Postural Assessment Scale for Stroke Patients, and Functional Ambulation Category (FAC) were evaluated (assessor-blinded) at baseline, and at 2 weeks, 4 weeks, and 3 months after stroke. Length of stay in the stroke center was also recorded. Results. The EM group showed significant improvement in FIM-motor score at all evaluated time points (P = .004) and in FAC outcomes at 2 weeks (P = .033) and 4 weeks (P = .011) after stroke. Length of stay in the stroke center was significantly shorter for the EM group (P = .004). Conclusion. Early out-of-bed mobilization via rehabilitation in a stroke center, within 24 to 72 hours of ICH, may improve early functional independence compared with standard early rehabilitation. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03292211.