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...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
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 |