Cargando…
Are People with Aphasia Included in Stroke Trials? A Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis
OBJECTIVE: To examine the proportion of people with aphasia (PwA) included and retained in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of stroke interventions published in the previous 6 years, as well as aphasia-relevant eligibility criteria and inclusion/retention strategies. DATA SOURCES: Comprehensive s...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10426244/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37186769 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/02692155231172009 |
_version_ | 1785090015608438784 |
---|---|
author | Vaughan, Eileen Manning, Molly X |
author_facet | Vaughan, Eileen Manning, Molly X |
author_sort | Vaughan, Eileen |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: To examine the proportion of people with aphasia (PwA) included and retained in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of stroke interventions published in the previous 6 years, as well as aphasia-relevant eligibility criteria and inclusion/retention strategies. DATA SOURCES: Comprehensive searching of Embase, PubMed and Medline (Ovid) for the period January 2016 – November 2022. REVIEW METHODS: RCTs examining stroke interventions targeting cognition, psychological wellbeing/health-related quality of life (HRQL), multidisciplinary rehabilitation, and self-management were included. Methodological quality was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) Randomised Controlled Trial checklist. Descriptive statistics were applied to extracted data, and results were reported narratively. RESULTS: Fifty-seven RCTs were included. These examined self-management (32%), physical (26%) psychological wellbeing/HRQL (18%), cognitive (14%), and multidisciplinary (11%) interventions. Of 7313 participants, 107 (1.5%) had aphasia and were included in three trials. About one-third did not report on aphasia (32%); over one quarter required functional communication (28%); one quarter excluded all aphasia (25%); and 14% excluded severe aphasia. No aphasia-specific inclusion/retention strategies were available. CONCLUSION: The findings highlight ongoing under-representation. However, due to shortcomings in aphasia reporting, the findings may underestimate actual inclusion rate. Excluding PwA has implications for the external validity, effectiveness, and implementation of stroke research findings. Triallists may require support in aphasia research strategies and methodological reporting. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10426244 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | SAGE Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-104262442023-08-16 Are People with Aphasia Included in Stroke Trials? A Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis Vaughan, Eileen Manning, Molly X Clin Rehabil Exploratory Studies OBJECTIVE: To examine the proportion of people with aphasia (PwA) included and retained in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of stroke interventions published in the previous 6 years, as well as aphasia-relevant eligibility criteria and inclusion/retention strategies. DATA SOURCES: Comprehensive searching of Embase, PubMed and Medline (Ovid) for the period January 2016 – November 2022. REVIEW METHODS: RCTs examining stroke interventions targeting cognition, psychological wellbeing/health-related quality of life (HRQL), multidisciplinary rehabilitation, and self-management were included. Methodological quality was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) Randomised Controlled Trial checklist. Descriptive statistics were applied to extracted data, and results were reported narratively. RESULTS: Fifty-seven RCTs were included. These examined self-management (32%), physical (26%) psychological wellbeing/HRQL (18%), cognitive (14%), and multidisciplinary (11%) interventions. Of 7313 participants, 107 (1.5%) had aphasia and were included in three trials. About one-third did not report on aphasia (32%); over one quarter required functional communication (28%); one quarter excluded all aphasia (25%); and 14% excluded severe aphasia. No aphasia-specific inclusion/retention strategies were available. CONCLUSION: The findings highlight ongoing under-representation. However, due to shortcomings in aphasia reporting, the findings may underestimate actual inclusion rate. Excluding PwA has implications for the external validity, effectiveness, and implementation of stroke research findings. Triallists may require support in aphasia research strategies and methodological reporting. SAGE Publications 2023-05-15 2023-10 /pmc/articles/PMC10426244/ /pubmed/37186769 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/02692155231172009 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access page (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage). |
spellingShingle | Exploratory Studies Vaughan, Eileen Manning, Molly X Are People with Aphasia Included in Stroke Trials? A Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis |
title | Are People with Aphasia Included in Stroke Trials? A Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis |
title_full | Are People with Aphasia Included in Stroke Trials? A Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis |
title_fullStr | Are People with Aphasia Included in Stroke Trials? A Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis |
title_full_unstemmed | Are People with Aphasia Included in Stroke Trials? A Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis |
title_short | Are People with Aphasia Included in Stroke Trials? A Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis |
title_sort | are people with aphasia included in stroke trials? a systematic review and narrative synthesis |
topic | Exploratory Studies |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10426244/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37186769 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/02692155231172009 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT vaughaneileen arepeoplewithaphasiaincludedinstroketrialsasystematicreviewandnarrativesynthesis AT manningmollyx arepeoplewithaphasiaincludedinstroketrialsasystematicreviewandnarrativesynthesis |