Assessment of sensory impairment of the upper limb post-stroke by occupational therapists within the acute setting: A mixed methods study exploring current clinical practice.
Danielle Byrne, Liana S Cahill, Christopher Barr and 1 others
PMID 40336558WHAT IT FOUND
Surveyed acute stroke occupational therapists reported standardised sensory assessment use: always 3, usually 11, sometimes 21, rarely 33, never 13.
Time and resources made full assessment hard, despite therapists seeing it as their role.
Key findings
01Survey therapists reported standardised sensory assessment use as always 3, usually 11, sometimes 21, rarely 33, and never 13.
02Time was a major barrier for 78.8% (n = 67) of survey participants, and focus group therapists said they needed a quick screen that could ideally be done in 5–10 minutes.
03Focus group therapists described using a global, gross sensory screen based on clinical judgement, and said they needed more knowledge of evidence-based sensory assessment and intervention.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for OTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The focus groups had nine therapists, and the authors said this was too small to reach saturation. All focus group therapists were Melbourne-based, so rural and interstate acute stroke practice was not represented. Therapists were recruited from neurology special interest groups, which may have selected for people already interested in sensory assessment. The survey had missing data: 47 participants skipped the final question about other ways they may have assessed sensory impairment.
Declared interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest and no financial support for the research, authorship, or publication.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read this as showing that standardised sensory assessment improves recovery. It reports therapists' practice and barriers, not a test of patient recovery.