Cargando…

Challenges of Estimating Accurate Prevalence of Arm Weakness Early After Stroke

Background. Recent studies have reported lower statistics of upper limb (UL) weakness (48-57%) compared to widely cited values collected over 2 decades ago (70-80%). Objective. To explore potential factors contributing to the accuracy of prevalence values of UL weakness using a case study from a sin...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Simpson, Lisa A., Hayward, Kathryn S., McPeake, Moira, Field, Thalia S., Eng, Janice J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8442135/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34319189
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/15459683211028240
_version_ 1783752960938868736
author Simpson, Lisa A.
Hayward, Kathryn S.
McPeake, Moira
Field, Thalia S.
Eng, Janice J.
author_facet Simpson, Lisa A.
Hayward, Kathryn S.
McPeake, Moira
Field, Thalia S.
Eng, Janice J.
author_sort Simpson, Lisa A.
collection PubMed
description Background. Recent studies have reported lower statistics of upper limb (UL) weakness (48-57%) compared to widely cited values collected over 2 decades ago (70-80%). Objective. To explore potential factors contributing to the accuracy of prevalence values of UL weakness using a case study from a single regional centre. Methods. All patients admitted to the acute stroke unit with suspected diagnosis of stroke were screened from February 2016 to August 2017. Upper limb weakness was captured (a) prospectively using the Shoulder Abduction and Finger Extension (SAFE) score performed by unit physical therapists within 7 days post-stroke and (b) retrospectively via chart review using the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) arm score at admission and 24 hours post-admission. Results. A total of 656 patients were admitted with a first-ever stroke, and 621 (95%) individuals were administered the SAFE score. A total of 40% of individuals had UL weakness using the SAFE score (SAFE ≤8) at a mean time of 1.9 (SD 1.5) days post-stroke. In the same sample, 57% and 49% had UL weakness using the admission and 24-hour post-admission NIHSS arm score, respectively. Conclusions. The accuracy of population-level UL weakness prevalence values can be affected by weakness measure and score cut-off, time post-stroke weakness is captured, sample characteristics and use of single or multiple sites. Researchers using prevalence values for clinical trial planning should consider these attributes when using prevalence data for estimating recruitment rates and resource needs.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8442135
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84421352021-09-16 Challenges of Estimating Accurate Prevalence of Arm Weakness Early After Stroke Simpson, Lisa A. Hayward, Kathryn S. McPeake, Moira Field, Thalia S. Eng, Janice J. Neurorehabil Neural Repair Original Research Articles Background. Recent studies have reported lower statistics of upper limb (UL) weakness (48-57%) compared to widely cited values collected over 2 decades ago (70-80%). Objective. To explore potential factors contributing to the accuracy of prevalence values of UL weakness using a case study from a single regional centre. Methods. All patients admitted to the acute stroke unit with suspected diagnosis of stroke were screened from February 2016 to August 2017. Upper limb weakness was captured (a) prospectively using the Shoulder Abduction and Finger Extension (SAFE) score performed by unit physical therapists within 7 days post-stroke and (b) retrospectively via chart review using the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) arm score at admission and 24 hours post-admission. Results. A total of 656 patients were admitted with a first-ever stroke, and 621 (95%) individuals were administered the SAFE score. A total of 40% of individuals had UL weakness using the SAFE score (SAFE ≤8) at a mean time of 1.9 (SD 1.5) days post-stroke. In the same sample, 57% and 49% had UL weakness using the admission and 24-hour post-admission NIHSS arm score, respectively. Conclusions. The accuracy of population-level UL weakness prevalence values can be affected by weakness measure and score cut-off, time post-stroke weakness is captured, sample characteristics and use of single or multiple sites. Researchers using prevalence values for clinical trial planning should consider these attributes when using prevalence data for estimating recruitment rates and resource needs. SAGE Publications 2021-07-28 2021-10 /pmc/articles/PMC8442135/ /pubmed/34319189 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/15459683211028240 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 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 Original Research Articles
Simpson, Lisa A.
Hayward, Kathryn S.
McPeake, Moira
Field, Thalia S.
Eng, Janice J.
Challenges of Estimating Accurate Prevalence of Arm Weakness Early After Stroke
title Challenges of Estimating Accurate Prevalence of Arm Weakness Early After Stroke
title_full Challenges of Estimating Accurate Prevalence of Arm Weakness Early After Stroke
title_fullStr Challenges of Estimating Accurate Prevalence of Arm Weakness Early After Stroke
title_full_unstemmed Challenges of Estimating Accurate Prevalence of Arm Weakness Early After Stroke
title_short Challenges of Estimating Accurate Prevalence of Arm Weakness Early After Stroke
title_sort challenges of estimating accurate prevalence of arm weakness early after stroke
topic Original Research Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8442135/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34319189
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/15459683211028240
work_keys_str_mv AT simpsonlisaa challengesofestimatingaccurateprevalenceofarmweaknessearlyafterstroke
AT haywardkathryns challengesofestimatingaccurateprevalenceofarmweaknessearlyafterstroke
AT mcpeakemoira challengesofestimatingaccurateprevalenceofarmweaknessearlyafterstroke
AT fieldthalias challengesofestimatingaccurateprevalenceofarmweaknessearlyafterstroke
AT engjanicej challengesofestimatingaccurateprevalenceofarmweaknessearlyafterstroke