“Measuring capacity and performances of ambulation in clinical setting and community setting in patients with stroke”.
Background: Stroke is the leading cause of long-term disability among adults. Its consequences can be described in the context of impairments, activity limitations, and participation restriction as well as personal and environmental factors according to the International classification of functioning, disability and health (ICF formulated by the WHO). It is common assumption that patients with stroke differ in their performances in the clinical & community setting, the latter being more challenging. However, this difference in performance is not quantified & documented. Hence this study is taken up to investigate the difference in capacity & performance of walking ability in patients with stroke with the help of most commonly used scale of functioning mobility i.e. Timed up & Go Test & 5 domains of ICF coding. Method: 45 samples were selected for the study by the purposive sampling method, who were ambulatory and able to walk minimum 3 metres distance with or without assistance. The study design was an observational study. After approval of ethical committee consent form were collected from the patients. Timed Up and Go test was administered in two setups clinical and community, time required to cover the distance was observed and recorded. 5 domains of ICF were also administered on patients. Conclusion: We conclude that there is no significant difference between capacity and performance of ambulation in clinical setting and community setting in patients with stroke. But it was commonly observed that clinical setup time taken was slightly more compared to community setup.
Keywords:Timed “Up and Go” scale, ICF Domains, Stroke patients, ambulation, clinical set up and community set up.
Roger V, Heart, and stroke statistical-2012: American Heart Association. 2012/15December.
Lindgren, I. Prevalence, contributing factors and consequences in daily life: Shoulder pain after stroke. 2013; Rehabilitation medicine.
H. P. Von Schroeder, R. D. Coutts, P. D. Lyden, E. Billings Jr., and V. L. Nickel, “Gait parameters following stroke: a practical assessment,” Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 25–31.
S. J. Olney and C. Richards, “Hemiparetic gait following stroke. Part I: characteristics,” Gait and Posture, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 136–148.
D. T. Wade and R. L. Hewer, “Functional abilities after stroke: measurement, natural history and prognosis,” Journal of Neurology Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 177–182.
K. Hill, P. Ellis, J. Bernhardt, P. Maggs, and S. Hull, “Balance and mobility outcomes for stroke patients: a comprehensive audit,” Australian Journal of Physiotherapy, vol. 43, no. 3, pp. 173–180.
S. Lord, K. M. McPherson, H. K. McNaughton, L. Rochester, and M. Weatherall. “How feasible is the attainment of community ambulation after stroke? A pilot randomized controlled trial to evaluate community-based physiotherapy in subacute stroke: Clinical Rehabilitation, vol. 22: pg no.3, pp. 215–225.
De Sèze M., Wiart L., Bon-Saint-Côme A. Rehabilitation of postural disturbances of hemiplegic patients by using trunk control retraining during exploratory exercises: Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. 2001; 82(6):793–800.
Ikai T., Kamikubo T., Takehara I., Nishi M., Miyano S. Dynamic postural control in patients with hemiparesis: American Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. 2003; 82(6):463–469.
Paillex R., So A. Changes in the standing posture of stroke patients during rehabilitation: Gait and Posture. 2005; 21(4):403–409.
Chagas E. F., Tavares M. S. Relationship between this condition and functional activity performance: Revista de Fisioterapia da Universidade de São Paulo. 2001; 8(1):40–50.
Dickstein R., Shefi S., Marcovitz E., Villa Y. Anticipatory postural adjustment in selected trunk muscles in post stroke hemiparetic patients: Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. 2004; 85(2):261–267.
Jeyaray Durai Pandian and Paulin Sudhan. Stroke epidemiology and stroke care services: Indian journal of stroke. 2013; vol.15. (3):128-134.
Podsiadlo D, and Richardson S. The timed “Up and Go”: A test of basic mobility for frail elderly persons. 1991; J Am Geriatr Soc 39:142.
Isles R. Normal values of balance tests in women aged 20-80: J Am Geriatr Soc. 2004; 52:1367.
Pondal M, Del Ser T. Normative data and determinants for the timed Up and Go test in a population-based sample of elderly individuals without gait disturbances: J Geriatr Phys. 2008 Ther31(2):7.
Faria C, Taixeira-Salmela L, Naudeau S. Effects of the direction of turning on the timed Up and Go test with stroke patients: Top Stroke Rehabil. 2009; 16:196.
Ng, S, and Hui-Chan, C. The timed Up and Go test: Its reliability and association with lower-limb impairments and locomotor capacities in people with chronic stroke. 2005; Arch Phys Med Rehabil 86:1641.
Campbell C. The effect of attentional demands on the timed Up and Go test in order adults with and without Parkinson's disease: Neuro Rep. 2003; 3:2.
Dibble L, Lange M. Predicting falls in individuals with Parkinson's disease: A reconsideration of clinical balance measures. 2006; 30:60.
Steffen T, Hacker T, Mollinger L. Phys Ther.2002;82(2):128-137.
Richard W Bohannon. Perceptual and motor skills: 1991; 73(1),146-146.
Kwan-Shan Chan. Effects of a single session of whole-body vibration on ankle plantarflexion spasticity and gait performance in patients with chronic stroke: sage journal. 2012.
Soria Silva. Evaluation of post-stroke functionally based on the International classification of functioning, Disability, and Health: J.Phys.Ther.Sci. 2015;27:1665-1670.
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2021 DIPALEE BAMBLE, Dr. Maheshwari Harishchandre, Dr. Suvarna Ganvir
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.