Louis Biasin1, Michael D Sage2, Karen Brunton3, Julia Fraser4, Jo-Anne Howe5, Mark Bayley6, Dina Brooks7, William E McIlroy8, Avril Mansfield9, Elizabeth L Inness10. 1. L. Biasin, BSc, BScPT, Toronto Rehabilitation Institute-Mobility Team, University Health Network, Room 11-107, Toronto, Canada, M5G 2A2; and Department of Physical Therapy, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. louis.biasin@uhn.ca. 2. M.D. Sage, MSc, Toronto Rehabilitation Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, Canada; and Graduate Department of Rehabilitation Science, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 3. K. Brunton, BScPT, Toronto Rehabilitation Institute, University Health Network; and Department of Physical Therapy, University of Toronto. 4. J. Fraser, MSc, Toronto Rehabilitation Institute, University Health Network; and Graduate Department of Rehabilitation Science, University of Toronto. 5. J-A. Howe, DipP&OT, BScPT, Toronto Rehabilitation Institute, University Health Network; and Department of Physical Therapy, University of Toronto. 6. M. Bayley, MD, Toronto Rehabilitation Institute, University Health Network. 7. D. Brooks, PhD, Toronto Rehabilitation Institute, University Health Network; Department of Physical Therapy, University of Toronto; and Graduate Department of Rehabilitation Science, University of Toronto. 8. W.E. McIlroy, PhD, Toronto Rehabilitation Institute, University Health Network; Graduate Department of Rehabilitation Science, University of Toronto; Canadian Partnership for Stroke Recovery, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto; and Department of Kinesiology, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Canada. 9. A. Mansfield, PhD, Toronto Rehabilitation Institute, University Health Network; Department of Physical Therapy, University of Toronto; Graduate Department of Rehabilitation Science, University of Toronto; and Canadian Partnership for Stroke Recovery, Sunnybrook Research Institute. 10. E.L. Inness, BScPT, MSc, PhD candidate, Toronto Rehabilitation Institute, University Health Network; Department of Physical Therapy, University of Toronto; and Graduate Department of Rehabilitation Science, University of Toronto.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Aerobic activity positively affects patients recovering from stroke and is part of best practice guidelines, yet this evidence has not been translated to routine practice. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of a model of care that integrated aerobic training in an inpatient rehabilitation setting for patients in the subacute stage of stroke recovery. Key elements of the program were personalized training prescription based on submaximal test results and supervision within a group setting. DESIGN: This was a prospective cohort study. METHODS: Participants (N=78) completed submaximal exercise testing prior to enrollment, and the test results were used by their treating physical therapists for exercise prescription. Feasibility was evaluated using enrollment, class attendance, adherence to prescription, and participant perceptions. RESULTS: Overall, 31 patients (40%) were referred to and completed the exercise program. Cardiac comorbidities were the main reason for nonreferral to the fitness group. Program attendance was 77%; scheduling conflicts were the primary barrier to participation. The majority of participants (63%) achieved 20 minutes of continuous exercise by the end of the program. No adverse events were reported, all participants felt they benefited from the program, and 80% of the participants expressed interest in continuing to exercise regularly after discharge. LIMITATIONS: Cardiac comorbidities prevented enrollment in the program for 27% of the admitted patients, and strategies for inclusion in exercise programs in this population should be explored. CONCLUSIONS: This individualized exercise program within a group delivery model was feasible; however, ensuring adequate aerobic targets were met was a challenge, and future work should focus on how best to include individuals with cardiac comorbidities.
BACKGROUND: Aerobic activity positively affects patients recovering from stroke and is part of best practice guidelines, yet this evidence has not been translated to routine practice. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of a model of care that integrated aerobic training in an inpatient rehabilitation setting for patients in the subacute stage of stroke recovery. Key elements of the program were personalized training prescription based on submaximal test results and supervision within a group setting. DESIGN: This was a prospective cohort study. METHODS:Participants (N=78) completed submaximal exercise testing prior to enrollment, and the test results were used by their treating physical therapists for exercise prescription. Feasibility was evaluated using enrollment, class attendance, adherence to prescription, and participant perceptions. RESULTS: Overall, 31 patients (40%) were referred to and completed the exercise program. Cardiac comorbidities were the main reason for nonreferral to the fitness group. Program attendance was 77%; scheduling conflicts were the primary barrier to participation. The majority of participants (63%) achieved 20 minutes of continuous exercise by the end of the program. No adverse events were reported, all participants felt they benefited from the program, and 80% of the participants expressed interest in continuing to exercise regularly after discharge. LIMITATIONS: Cardiac comorbidities prevented enrollment in the program for 27% of the admitted patients, and strategies for inclusion in exercise programs in this population should be explored. CONCLUSIONS: This individualized exercise program within a group delivery model was feasible; however, ensuring adequate aerobic targets were met was a challenge, and future work should focus on how best to include individuals with cardiac comorbidities.
Authors: Neil F Gordon; Meg Gulanick; Fernando Costa; Gerald Fletcher; Barry A Franklin; Elliot J Roth; Tim Shephard Journal: Stroke Date: 2004-05 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: C Gowland; P Stratford; M Ward; J Moreland; W Torresin; S Van Hullenaar; J Sanford; S Barreca; B Vanspall; N Plews Journal: Stroke Date: 1993-01 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Nancy E Mayo; Marilyn J MacKay-Lyons; Susan C Scott; Carolina Moriello; James Brophy Journal: Clin Rehabil Date: 2013-03-15 Impact factor: 3.477
Authors: Gillian E Mead; Carolyn A Greig; Irene Cunningham; Susan J Lewis; Susie Dinan; David H Saunders; Claire Fitzsimons; Archie Young Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2007-06 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Elizabeth L Inness; Mark Bayley; Louis Biasin; Karen Brunton; Cynthia J Danells; Avril Mansfield; William E McIlroy; Vivien Poon; Nancy M Salbach; Joanne Zee Journal: Physiother Can Date: 2017 Impact factor: 1.037
Authors: Elizabeth W Regan; Reed Handlery; Jill C Stewart; Joseph L Pearson; Sara Wilcox; Stacy Fritz Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-03-29 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Sandra A Billinger; Jesse C Craig; Sarah J Kwapiszeski; Jason-Flor V Sisante; Eric D Vidoni; Rebecca Maletsky; David C Poole Journal: J Appl Physiol (1985) Date: 2017-03-09
Authors: Avril Mansfield; Dina Brooks; Ada Tang; Denise Taylor; Elizabeth L Inness; Alex Kiss; Laura Middleton; Louis Biasin; Rebecca Fleck; Esmé French; Kathryn LeBlanc; Anthony Aqui; Cynthia Danells Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2017-06-30 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: David R Wilson; Anna E Mattlage; Nicole M Seier; Jonathan D Todd; Brian G Price; Sarah J Kwapiszeski; Rakesh Vardey; Sandra A Billinger Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-02-16 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Liam P Kelly; Augustine J Devasahayam; Arthur R Chaves; Marie E Curtis; Edward W Randell; Jason McCarthy; Fabien A Basset; Michelle Ploughman Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2021-05-30 Impact factor: 4.241
Authors: Avril Mansfield; Svetlana Knorr; Vivien Poon; Elizabeth L Inness; Laura Middleton; Louis Biasin; Karen Brunton; Jo-Anne Howe; Dina Brooks Journal: Stroke Res Treat Date: 2016-05-30