Cargando…

Does evidence really matter? Professionals’ opinions on the practice of early mobilization after stroke

INTRODUCTION: Early mobilization after stroke may be important for a good outcome and it is currently recommended in a range of international guidelines. The evidence base, however, is limited and clear definitions of what constitutes early mobilization are lacking. AIMS: To explore stroke care prof...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sjöholm, Anna, Skarin, Monica, Linden, Thomas, Bernhardt, Julie
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove Medical Press 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3210077/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22096341
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/JMDH.S24592
_version_ 1782215700648034304
author Sjöholm, Anna
Skarin, Monica
Linden, Thomas
Bernhardt, Julie
author_facet Sjöholm, Anna
Skarin, Monica
Linden, Thomas
Bernhardt, Julie
author_sort Sjöholm, Anna
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Early mobilization after stroke may be important for a good outcome and it is currently recommended in a range of international guidelines. The evidence base, however, is limited and clear definitions of what constitutes early mobilization are lacking. AIMS: To explore stroke care professionals’ opinions about (1) when after stroke, first mobilization should take place, (2) whether early mobilization may affect patients’ final outcome, and (3) what level of evidence they require to be convinced that early mobilization is beneficial. METHODS: A nine-item questionnaire was used to interview stroke care professionals during a conference in Sydney, Australia. RESULTS: Among 202 professionals interviewed, 40% were in favor of mobilizing both ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke patients within 24 hours of stroke onset. There was no clear agreement about the optimal time point beyond 24 hours. Most professionals thought that patients’ final motor outcome (76%), cognitive outcome (57%), and risk of depression (75%) depends on being mobilized early. Only 19% required a large randomized controlled trial or a systematic review to be convinced of benefit. CONCLUSION: The spread in opinion reflects the absence of clear guidelines and knowledge in this important area of stroke recovery and rehabilitation, which suggests further research is required.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3210077
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher Dove Medical Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-32100772011-11-17 Does evidence really matter? Professionals’ opinions on the practice of early mobilization after stroke Sjöholm, Anna Skarin, Monica Linden, Thomas Bernhardt, Julie J Multidiscip Healthc Original Research INTRODUCTION: Early mobilization after stroke may be important for a good outcome and it is currently recommended in a range of international guidelines. The evidence base, however, is limited and clear definitions of what constitutes early mobilization are lacking. AIMS: To explore stroke care professionals’ opinions about (1) when after stroke, first mobilization should take place, (2) whether early mobilization may affect patients’ final outcome, and (3) what level of evidence they require to be convinced that early mobilization is beneficial. METHODS: A nine-item questionnaire was used to interview stroke care professionals during a conference in Sydney, Australia. RESULTS: Among 202 professionals interviewed, 40% were in favor of mobilizing both ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke patients within 24 hours of stroke onset. There was no clear agreement about the optimal time point beyond 24 hours. Most professionals thought that patients’ final motor outcome (76%), cognitive outcome (57%), and risk of depression (75%) depends on being mobilized early. Only 19% required a large randomized controlled trial or a systematic review to be convinced of benefit. CONCLUSION: The spread in opinion reflects the absence of clear guidelines and knowledge in this important area of stroke recovery and rehabilitation, which suggests further research is required. Dove Medical Press 2011-10-25 /pmc/articles/PMC3210077/ /pubmed/22096341 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/JMDH.S24592 Text en © 2011 Sjöholm et al, publisher and licensee Dove Medical Press Ltd. This is an Open Access article which permits unrestricted noncommercial use, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Research
Sjöholm, Anna
Skarin, Monica
Linden, Thomas
Bernhardt, Julie
Does evidence really matter? Professionals’ opinions on the practice of early mobilization after stroke
title Does evidence really matter? Professionals’ opinions on the practice of early mobilization after stroke
title_full Does evidence really matter? Professionals’ opinions on the practice of early mobilization after stroke
title_fullStr Does evidence really matter? Professionals’ opinions on the practice of early mobilization after stroke
title_full_unstemmed Does evidence really matter? Professionals’ opinions on the practice of early mobilization after stroke
title_short Does evidence really matter? Professionals’ opinions on the practice of early mobilization after stroke
title_sort does evidence really matter? professionals’ opinions on the practice of early mobilization after stroke
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3210077/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22096341
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/JMDH.S24592
work_keys_str_mv AT sjoholmanna doesevidencereallymatterprofessionalsopinionsonthepracticeofearlymobilizationafterstroke
AT skarinmonica doesevidencereallymatterprofessionalsopinionsonthepracticeofearlymobilizationafterstroke
AT lindenthomas doesevidencereallymatterprofessionalsopinionsonthepracticeofearlymobilizationafterstroke
AT bernhardtjulie doesevidencereallymatterprofessionalsopinionsonthepracticeofearlymobilizationafterstroke