Family-Centered Care During Constraint-Induced Therapy After Chronic Stroke: A Feasibility Study.
Sarah Blanton, Deborah Cussen Scheibe, Ashley Holmes Rutledge and 3 others
PMID 31688561WHAT IT FOUND
A carepartner program given with constraint-induced therapy after stroke was feasible: all seven survivors completed 10 sessions, with no adverse events.
Descriptive caregiver and survivor gains occurred, but the small single-group study cannot separate the program from therapy.
Key findings
01All stroke survivors completed the 10 CIMT sessions and follow-up evaluations, with 100% adherence and no reported adverse events.
02All carepartners completed the workbook and attended the first session, but 3 could not attend every session and received telephone review instead.
03Descriptive outcomes were mixed: caregivers reported fewer depressive symptoms, less fatigue, and less family conflict, while early Wolf Motor Function Test speed gains were not maintained.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTsWhat it means for RNs
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
Only seven stroke survivors and seven carepartners were studied, so the findings cannot show that the intervention works for a wider group. The study had no comparison group and used only descriptive statistics, so changes cannot be tested as treatment effects. Caregivers received the workbook while stroke survivors also received constraint-induced movement therapy, so the contribution of any single component cannot be separated. Three carepartners did not attend all clinic sessions, and the study did not track the amount of daily home practice. Participants had to have adequate hand movement, no severe cognitive deficits, and completed traditional rehabilitation, so results may not apply to more impaired or early stroke survivors. Follow-up was only one month, and some early speed gains were not maintained.
Declared interests
The authors report no conflicts of interest.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read the improved caregiver mood, fatigue, conflict, or arm function as proof that the carepartner program works. The study had no control group, only seven dyads, used descriptive statistics, and gave the program together with constraint-induced therapy, including mitt use and functional task practice, so neither the program nor its components can be isolated.