In order to achieve a level of community involvement and physical independence, being able to walk is the primary aim of many stroke survivors. It is therefore one of the most important goals during rehabilitation. Falls are common in all stages after stroke. Reported fall rates in the chronic stage after stroke range from 43 to 70% during one year follow up. Moreover, stroke survivors are more likely to become repeated fallers as compared to healthy older adults. Considering the devastating effects of falls in stroke survivors, adequate fall risk assessment is of paramount importance, as it is a first step in targeted fall prevention. As the majority of all falls occur during dynamic activities such as walking, fall risk could be assessed using gait analysis. It is only recent that technology enables us to monitor gait over several consecutive days, thereby allowing us to assess quality of gait in daily life. This thesis studies a variety of gait assessments with respect to their ability to assess fall risk in ambulatory chronic stroke survivors, and explores whether stroke survivors can improve their gait stability through PBT.
DOCUMENT
Background: A significant part of neurological rehabilitation focuses on facilitating the learning of motor skills. Training can adopt either (more) explicit or (more) implicit forms of motor learning. Gait is one of the most practiced motor skills within rehabilitation in people after stroke because it is an important criterion for discharge and requirement for functioning at home. Objective: The aim of this study was to describe the design of a randomized controlled study assessing the effects of implicit motor learning compared with the explicit motor learning in gait rehabilitation of people suffering from stroke. Methods: The study adopts a randomized, controlled, single-blinded study design. People after stroke will be eligible for participation when they are in the chronic stage of recovery (>6 months after stroke), would like to improve walking performance, have a slow walking speed (<1 m/s), can communicate in Dutch, and complete a 3-stage command. People will be excluded if they cannot walk a minimum of 10 m or have other additional impairments that (severely) influence gait. Participants will receive 9 gait-training sessions over a 3-week period and will be randomly allocated to an implicit or explicit group. Therapists are aware of the intervention they provide, and the assessors are blind to the intervention participants receive. Outcome will be assessed at baseline (T0), directly after the intervention (T1), and after 1 month (T2). The primary outcome parameter is walking velocity. Walking performance will be assessed with the 10-meter walking test, Dynamic Gait Index, and while performing a secondary task (dual task). Self-reported measures are the Movement Specific Reinvestment Scale, verbal protocol, Stroke and Aphasia Quality of Life Scale, and the Global Perceived Effect scale. A process evaluation will take place to identify how the therapy was perceived and identify factors that may have influenced the effectiveness of the intervention. Repeated measures analyses will be conducted to determine significant and clinical relevant differences between groups and over time. Results: Data collection is currently ongoing and results are expected in 2019. Conclusions: The relevance of the study as well as the advantages and disadvantages of several aspects of the chosen design are discussed, for example, the personalized approach and choice of measurements.
DOCUMENT
Background Objective gait analysis that fully captures the multi-segmental foot movement of a clubfoot may help in early identification of a relapse clubfoot. Unfortunately, this type of objective measure is still lacking in a clinical setting and it is unknown how it relates to clinical assessment. Research question The aim of this study was to identify differences in total gait and foot deviations between clubfoot patients with and without a relapse clubfoot and to evaluate their relationship with clinical status. Methods In this study, Ponseti-treated idiopathic clubfoot patients were included and divided into clubfoot patients with and without a relapse. Objective gait analysis was done resulting in total gait and foot scores and clinical assessment was performed using the Clubfoot Assessment Protocol (CAP). Additionally, a new clubfoot specific foot score, the clubFoot Deviation Index (cFDI*), was calculated to better capture foot kinematics of clubfoot patients. Results Clubfoot patients with a relapse show lower total gait quality (GDI*) and lower clinical status defined by the CAP than clubfoot patients without a relapse. Abnormal cFDI* was found in relapse patients, reflected by differences in corresponding variable scores. Moderate relationships were found for the subdomains of the CAP and total gait and foot quality in all clubfoot patients. Significance A new total foot score was introduced in this study, which was more relevant for the clubfoot population. The use of this new foot score (cFDI*) besides the GDI*, is recommended to identify gait and foot motion deviations. Along with clinical assessment, this will give an overview of the overall status of the complex, multi-segmental aspects of a (relapsed) clubfoot. The relationships found in this study suggest that clinical assessment might be indicative of a deviation in total gait and foot pattern, therefore hinting towards personalised screening for better treatment decision making.
MULTIFILE
