Process Evaluation of a Randomized Controlled Trial of an Enhanced Rehabilitation Transition Program for Stroke Survivors.
Rebecca M Bollinger, Melissa J Krauss, Brianna M Holden and 5 others
PMID 41205849WHAT IT FOUND
Stroke survivors receiving home modifications and strategy training had better daily activity performance and fewer home barriers than those receiving education alone, but community participation did not improve.
The intervention cost a median of $544 per person and was well-adhered to at 12 months.
Key findings
01The primary outcome of community participation showed no significant difference between groups, but secondary outcomes of daily activity performance and satisfaction improved significantly.
02Home modifications and strategy training significantly reduced environmental barriers in the home compared to attention control.
03Adherence to home modifications was high at 12 months, with architectural changes like grab bars being used more consistently than adaptive equipment.
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 study was conducted in an urban/suburban area, so applicability to rural settings is unknown. Cost analysis excluded occupational therapist time and insurance considerations. The COVID-19 pandemic restricted the ability to fully examine community reintegration outcomes. Attrition was higher in the control group, which may bias comparisons. The barriers to implementing this specific program into routine clinical practice are not yet known.
Declared interests
The authors declared no competing interests.
The easy way to misread this
Do not assume this intervention improves overall community participation or reduces falls. The primary outcome for participation was null, and while skilled nursing admission and death rates were lower in the intervention group, falls did not differ significantly between groups.
Summarised by AI from the full paper, without a clinician reviewing it. Check it against the source before it changes what you do. Read it on PubMed →