Comparison of Two Systems for Stroke Rehabilitation in a General Hospital

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
This study was designed to compare the effectiveness of stroke rehabilitation therapy in a specialized Stroke Unit with that provided on the medical service of a general hospital (Rhode Island Hospital). The 8-bed Stroke Unit is staffed by a multidisciplinary team, and a weekly conference is held for evaluation and planning. On the basis of data obtained from the hospital records, two groups of patients were studied: 224 who were treated in the Stroke Unit, and 110 who were evaluated and approved for admission to the Unit but were not accommodated. A rigid "first come, first served" policy for admission to the Unit was observed. Hypothesis testing was performed with reference to the patient's medical condition, socioeconomic status, demographic characteristics, and difficulties during hospital stay to determine whether the groups were comparable. A patient was considered to have improved if his condition decreased in severity between the time of admission to therapy and the time of discharge. Severity was rated as: mild (level one), moderate (level two), severe (level three), and profound (level four). No significant difference in rehabilitation results was found between the two treatment systems at severity levels two (moderate) and four (profound). However, the Stroke Unit attained significantly better results with level-three patients (severe stroke). This group received more sessions of physical therapy and remained in the hospital longer than did the level-three patients treated on the general medical service. Physicians referred patients selectively to the Stroke Unit, althoug the Unit had no policy of screening patients for admission, and this may have had some influence on the achievement of better results with level-three patients. Level-four patients did not do well in either setting.

This publication has 5 references indexed in Scilit: