| 1. |
- Burridge, J., et al.
(författare)
-
A systematic review of international clinical guidelines for rehabilitation of people with neurological conditions: What recommendations are made for upperlimb assessment?
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Frontiers in Neurology. - : Frontiers Media SA. - 1664-2295. ; 10
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Upper limb impairment is a common problem for people with neurological disabilities, affecting activity, performance, quality of life, and independence. Accurate, timely assessments are required for effective rehabilitation, and development of novel interventions. International consensus on upper limb assessment is needed to make research findings more meaningful, provide a benchmark for quality in clinical practice, more cost-effective neurorehabilitation and improved outcomes for neurological patients undergoing rehabilitation. Aim: To conduct a systematic review, as part of the output of a European COST Action, to identify what recommendations are made for upper limb assessment. Methods: We systematically reviewed published guidance on measures and protocols for assessment of upper limb function in neurological rehabilitation via electronic databases from January 2007-December 2017. Additional records were then identified through other sources. Records were selected for inclusion based on scanning of titles, abstracts and full text by two authors working independently, and a third author if there was disagreement. Records were included if they referred to "rehabilitation" and "assessment" or "measurement". Reasons for exclusion were documented. Results: From the initial 552 records identified (after duplicates were removed), 34 satisfied our criteria for inclusion, and only six recommended specific outcome measures and /or protocols. Records were divided into National Guidelines and other practice guidelines published in peer reviewed Journals. There was agreement that assessment is critical, should be conducted early and at regular intervals and that there is a need for standardized measures. Assessments should be conducted by a healthcare professional trained in using the measure and should encompass body function and structure, activity and participation. Conclusions: We present a comprehensive, critical, and original summary of current recommendations. Defining a core set of measures and agreed protocols requires international consensus between experts representing the diverse and multi-disciplinary field of neurorehabilitation including clinical researchers and practitioners, rehabilitation technology researchers, and commercial developers. Current lack of guidance may hold-back progress in understanding function and recovery. Together with a Delphi consensus study and an overview of systematic reviews of outcome measures it will contribute to the development of international guidelines for upper limb assessment in neurological conditions. © 2019 Burridge, Alt Murphy, Buurke, Feys, Keller, Klamroth-Marganska, Lamers, McNicholas, Prange, Tarkka, Timmermans and Hughes.
|
|
| 2. |
- Foulds, Chris, et al.
(författare)
-
An agenda for future Social Sciences and Humanities research on energy efficiency : 100 priority research questions
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Humanities & Social Sciences Communications. - : Springer Nature. - 2662-9992. ; 9:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Decades of techno-economic energy policymaking and research have meant evidence from the Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH)-including critical reflections on what changing a societys relation to energy (efficiency) even means-have been underutilised. In particular, (i) the SSH have too often been sidelined and/or narrowly pigeonholed by policymakers, funders, and other decision-makers when driving research agendas, and (ii) the setting of SSH-focused research agendas has not historically embedded inclusive and deliberative processes. The aim of this paper is to address these gaps through the production of a research agenda outlining future SSH research priorities for energy efficiency. A Horizon Scanning exercise was run, which sought to identify 100 priority SSH questions for energy efficiency research. This exercise included 152 researchers with prior SSH expertise on energy efficiency, who together spanned 62 (sub-)disciplines of SSH, 23 countries, and a full range of career stages. The resultant questions were inductively clustered into seven themes as follows: (1) Citizenship, engagement and knowledge exchange in relation to energy efficiency; (2) Energy efficiency in relation to equity, justice, poverty and vulnerability; (3) Energy efficiency in relation to everyday life and practices of energy consumption and production; (4) Framing, defining and measuring energy efficiency; (5) Governance, policy and political issues around energy efficiency; (6) Roles of economic systems, supply chains and financial mechanisms in improving energy efficiency; and (7) The interactions, unintended consequences and rebound effects of energy efficiency interventions. Given the consistent centrality of energy efficiency in policy programmes, this paper highlights that well-developed SSH approaches are ready to be mobilised to contribute to the development, and/or to understand the implications, of energy efficiency measures and governance solutions. Implicitly, it also emphasises the heterogeneity of SSH policy evidence that can be produced. The agenda will be of use for both (1) those new to the energy-SSH field (including policyworkers), for learnings on the capabilities and capacities of energy-SSH, and (2) established energy-SSH researchers, for insights on the collectively held futures of energy-SSH research.
|
|
| 3. |
- Hughes, A. M., et al.
(författare)
-
Evaluation of upper extremity neurorehabilitation using technology: a European Delphi consensus study within the EU COST Action Network on Robotics for Neurorehabilitation
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Journal of Neuroengineering and Rehabilitation. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1743-0003. ; 13
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: The need for cost-effective neurorehabilitation is driving investment into technologies for patient assessment and treatment. Translation of these technologies into clinical practice is limited by a paucity of evidence for cost-effectiveness. Methodological issues, including lack of agreement on assessment methods, limit the value of meta-analyses of trials. In this paper we report the consensus reached on assessment protocols and outcome measures for evaluation of the upper extremity in neurorehabilitation using technology. The outcomes of this research will be part of the development of European guidelines. Methods: A rigorous, systematic and comprehensive modified Delphi study incorporated questions and statements generation, design and piloting of consensus questionnaire and five consensus experts groups consisting of clinicians, clinical researchers, non-clinical researchers, and engineers, all with working experience of neurological assessments or technologies. For data analysis, two major groups were created: i) clinicians (e.g., practicing therapists and medical doctors) and ii) researchers (clinical and non-clinical researchers (e.g. movement scientists, technology developers and engineers). Results: Fifteen questions or statements were identified during an initial ideas generation round, following which the questionnaire was designed and piloted. Subsequently, questions and statements went through five consensus rounds over 20 months in four European countries. Two hundred eight participants: 60 clinicians (29 %), 35 clinical researchers (17 %), 77 non-clinical researchers (37 %) and 35 engineers (17 %) contributed. At each round questions and statements were added and others removed. Consensus (>= 69 %) was obtained for 22 statements on i) the perceived importance of recommendations; ii) the purpose of measurement; iii) use of a minimum set of measures; iv) minimum number, timing and duration of assessments; v) use of technology-generated assessments and the restriction of clinical assessments to validated outcome measures except in certain circumstances for research. Conclusions: Consensus was reached by a large international multidisciplinary expert panel on measures and protocols for assessment of the upper limb in research and clinical practice. Our results will inform the development of best practice for upper extremity assessment using technologies, and the formulation of evidence-based guidelines for the evaluation of upper extremity neurorehabilitation.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Kwakkel, G., et al.
(författare)
-
Standardized Measurement of Quality of Upper Limb Movement After Stroke: Consensus-Based Core Recommendations From the Second Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Roundtable
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair. - : SAGE Publications. - 1545-9683 .- 1552-6844. ; 33:11, s. 951-958
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The second Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Roundtable "metrics" task force developed consensus around the recognized need to add kinematic and kinetic movement quantification to its core recommendations for standardized measurements of sensorimotor recovery in stroke trials. Specifically, we focused on measurement of the quality of upper limb movement. We agreed that the recommended protocols for measurement should be conceptually rigorous, reliable, valid and responsive to change. The recommended measurement protocols include four performance assays (i.e. 2D planar reaching, finger individuation, grip strength, and precision grip at body function level) and one functional task (3D drinking task at activity level) that address body function and activity respectively. This document describes the criteria for assessment and makes recommendations about the type of technology that should be used for reliable and valid movement capture. Standardization of kinematic measurement protocols will allow pooling of participant data across sites, thereby increasing sample size aiding meta-analyses of published trials, more detailed exploration of recovery profiles, the generation of new research questions with testable hypotheses, and development of new treatment approaches focused on impairment. We urge the clinical and research community to consider adopting these recommendations.
|
|
| 6. |
- Pohl, J., et al.
(författare)
-
Consensus-Based Core Set of Outcome Measures for Clinical Motor Rehabilitation After Stroke-A Delphi Study
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Frontiers in Neurology. - : Frontiers Media SA. - 1664-2295. ; 11:September
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Introduction:Outcome measures are key to tailor rehabilitation goals to the stroke patient's individual needs and to monitor poststroke recovery. The large number of available outcome measures leads to high variability in clinical use. Currently, an internationally agreed core set of motor outcome measures for clinical application is lacking. Therefore, the goal was to develop such a set to serve as a quality standard in clinical motor rehabilitation poststroke. Methods:Outcome measures for the upper and lower extremities, and activities of daily living (ADL)/stroke-specific outcomes were identified and presented to stroke rehabilitation experts in an electronic Delphi study. In round 1, clinical feasibility and relevance of the outcome measures were rated on a 7-point Likert scale. In round 2, those rated at least as "relevant" and "feasible" were ranked within the body functions, activities, and participation domains of theInternational Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health(ICF). Furthermore, measurement time points poststroke were indicated. In round 3, answers were reviewed in reference to overall results to reach final consensus. Results:In total, 119 outcome measures were presented to 33 experts from 18 countries. The recommended core set includes the Fugl-Meyer Motor Assessment and Action Research Arm Test for the upper extremity section; the Fugl-Meyer Motor Assessment, 10-m Walk Test, Timed-Up-and-Go, and Berg Balance Scale for the lower extremity section; and the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale, and Barthel Index or Functional Independence Measure for the ADL/stroke-specific section. The Stroke Impact Scale was recommended spanning allICFdomains. Recommended measurement time points are days 2 +/- 1 and 7; weeks 2, 4, and 12; 6 months poststroke and every following 6th month. Discussion and Conclusion:Agreement was found upon a set of nine outcome measures for application in clinical motor rehabilitation poststroke, with seven measurement time points following the stages of poststroke recovery. This core set was specifically developed for clinical practice and distinguishes itself from initiatives for stroke rehabilitation research. The next challenge is to implement this clinical core set across the full stroke care continuum with the aim to improve the transparency, comparability, and quality of stroke rehabilitation at a regional, national, and international level.
|
|
| 7. |
- Prange-Lasonder, G. B., et al.
(författare)
-
European evidence-based recommendations for clinical assessment of upper limb in neurorehabilitation (CAULIN): data synthesis from systematic reviews, clinical practice guidelines and expert consensus
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1743-0003. ; 18:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Technology-supported rehabilitation can help alleviate the increasing need for cost-effective rehabilitation of neurological conditions, but use in clinical practice remains limited. Agreement on a core set of reliable, valid and accessible outcome measures to assess rehabilitation outcomes is needed to generate strong evidence about effectiveness of rehabilitation approaches, including technologies. This paper collates and synthesizes a core set from multiple sources; combining existing evidence, clinical practice guidelines and expert consensus into European recommendations for Clinical Assessment of Upper Limb In Neurorehabilitation (CAULIN). Methods Data from systematic reviews, clinical practice guidelines and expert consensus (Delphi methodology) were systematically extracted and synthesized using strength of evidence rating criteria, in addition to recommendations on assessment procedures. Three sets were defined: a core set: strong evidence for validity, reliability, responsiveness and clinical utility AND recommended by at least two sources; an extended set: strong evidence OR recommended by at least two sources and a supplementary set: some evidence OR recommended by at least one of the sources. Results In total, 12 measures (with primary focus on stroke) were included, encompassing body function and activity level of the International Classification of Functioning and Health. The core set recommended for clinical practice and research: Fugl-Meyer Assessment of Upper Extremity (FMA-UE) and Action Research Arm Test (ARAT); the extended set recommended for clinical practice and/or clinical research: kinematic measures, Box and Block Test (BBT), Chedoke Arm Hand Activity Inventory (CAHAI), Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT), Nine Hole Peg Test (NHPT) and ABILHAND; the supplementary set recommended for research or specific occasions: Motricity Index (MI); Chedoke-McMaster Stroke Assessment (CMSA), Stroke Rehabilitation Assessment Movement (STREAM), Frenchay Arm Test (FAT), Motor Assessment Scale (MAS) and body-worn movement sensors. Assessments should be conducted at pre-defined regular intervals by trained personnel. Global measures should be applied within 24 h of hospital admission and upper limb specific measures within 1 week. Conclusions The CAULIN recommendations for outcome measures and assessment procedures provide a clear, simple, evidence-based three-level structure for upper limb assessment in neurological rehabilitation. Widespread adoption and sustained use will improve quality of clinical practice and facilitate meta-analysis, critical for the advancement of technology-supported neurorehabilitation.
|
|
