Effectiveness of physiotherapy in Parkinson's disease: the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial. Facilitation of sensory and motor recovery by thermal intervention for the hemiplegic upper limb in acute stroke patients: a single-blind randomized clinical trial. Efficacy of a physical therapy program in patients with Parkinson's disease: a randomized controlled trial. Effect of a therapeutic intervention for the hemiplegic upper limb in the acute phase after stroke: a single-blind, randomized, controlled multicenter trial. Comparison of Bobath based and movement science based treatment for stroke: a randomised controlled trial. An outreach intervention to implement evidence based practice in residential care: a randomized controlled trial [ISRCTN67855475]. A randomized effectiveness trial of collaborative care for patients with panic disorder in primary care. Early combination of bromocriptine and levodopa in Parkinson's disease: a prospective randomized study of two parallel groups over a total follow-up period of 44 months including an initial 8-month double-blind stage. Effects of treatment intensity in upper limb robot-assisted therapy for chronic stroke: a pilot randomized controlled trial.
To study the feasibility of a large randomised controlled trial (RCT) evaluating the effectiveness of physiotherapy in Parkinson's disease (PD), 173 patients were asked to participate in a study with random allocation to best practice physiotherapy, or to no physiotherapy. The primary outcome measures were the Parkinson's disease questionnaire-39, the Parkinson activity scale, and a patient preference outcome scale (PPOS). Only 14% of the patients could be included in the study. The PPOS showed the largest effect size (0.74) with a significant group effect (p<0.05). Specific alterations to the study design to ensure successful RCTs in this field are recommended. Thermal stimulation (TS) is commonly used in orthopedic rehabilitation, but the role of TS in the facilitation of sensorimotor recovery in hemiplegic patients remains unknown. This study addressed the issue of TS intervention in the facilitation of functional outcomes.
                Forty-six stroke survivors were randomly assigned to standard rehabilitation treatment and standard treatment plus TS (30 minutes daily for 6 weeks). Twenty-nine patients completed the experiment. Six measures, including Brunnstrom stage, modified motor assessment scale, grasping strength, angles of wrist extension and flexion, sensation by monofilament, and muscle tone by modified Ashworth scale, were performed weekly to evaluate sensory and motor functional outcomes.
                The performance of Brunnstrom stage and wrist extension and sensation were improved significantly after TS intervention. Recovery rates of 6 measures after TS were significantly higher than those of the control, except for grasping. Similar muscle tones were found in both groups.
                TS on the paretic hand significantly enhances the recovery of several aspects of sensory and motor functions in hemiplegic stroke patients. To investigate the effects of a physical therapy (PT) program in groups of people with Parkinson's disease (PD).
                Randomized controlled trial with a crossover design.
                Two outpatient rehabilitation clinics in Boston and Amsterdam, respectively.
                Sixty-eight subjects diagnosed with typical, idiopathic PD, Hoehn and Yahr stage II or III, and stable medication use.
                Group A received PT and medication therapy (MT) for the first 6 weeks, followed by MT only for the second 6 weeks. Group B received only MT for the first 6 weeks and PT and MT for the second 6 weeks.
                The Sickness Impact Profile (SIP-68), the mobility portion of the SIP-68, the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS), and comfortable walking speed (CWS) at baseline, 6-week, 12-week, and 3-month follow-up.
                At 6 weeks, differences between groups were significant for the SIP mobility ( P =.015; effect size [ES]=.55), for CWS ( P =.012; ES=.49), for the activities of daily living (ADL) section of the UPDRS ( P =.014; ES=.45), and for the total UPDRS ( P =.007; ES=.56). The total SIP and the mentation and motor sections of the UPDRS did not differ significantly between groups. Significant differences were found at 3 months compared with baseline for CWS, the UPDRS ADL, and total scores.
                People with PD derive benefits in the short term from PT group treatment, in addition to their MT, for quality of life related to mobility, CWS, and ADLs; long-term benefits were found in CWS, UPDRS ADL, and total scores but varied between groups. Arm function recovery is notoriously poor in stroke patients. The effect of treatment modalities, particularly those directed at improving upper limb function, has been studied primarily in chronic stroke patients. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of a specific therapeutic intervention on arm function in the acute phase after stroke.
                In a single-blind, randomized, controlled multicenter trial, 100 consecutive patients were allocated to either an experimental group that received an additional treatment of sensorimotor stimulation or to a control group. The intervention was applied for 6 weeks. Patients were evaluated for level of impairment (Brunnström-Fugl-Meyer test) and disability (Action Research Arm test, Barthel Index) before, midway, and after the intervention period and at follow-up 6 and 12 months after stroke.
                Patients in the experimental group performed better on the Brunnström-Fugl-Meyer test than those in the control group throughout the study period, but differences were significant only at follow-up. Results on the Action Research Arm test and Barthel Index revealed no effect at the level of disability. The effect of the therapy was attributed to the repetitive stimulation of muscle activity. The treatment was most effective in patients with a severe motor deficit and hemianopia or hemi-inattention. No adverse effects due to the intervention were found.
                Adding a specific intervention during the acute phase after stroke improved motor recovery, which was apparent 1 year later. These results emphasize the potential beneficial effect of therapeutic interventions for the arm. Bobath based (BB) and movement science based (MSB) physiotherapy interventions are widely used for patients after stroke. There is little evidence to suggest which is most effective. This single-blind randomised controlled trial evaluated the effect of these treatments on movement abilities and functional independence.
                A total of 120 patients admitted to a stroke rehabilitation ward were randomised into two treatment groups to receive either BB or MSB treatment. Primary outcome measures were the Rivermead Motor Assessment and the Motor Assessment Scale. Secondary measures assessed functional independence, walking speed, arm function, muscle tone, and sensation. Measures were performed by a blinded assessor at baseline, and then at 1, 3, and 6 months after baseline. Analysis of serial measurements was performed to compare outcomes between the groups by calculating the area under the curve (AUC) and inserting AUC values into Mann-Whitney U tests.
                Comparison between groups showed no significant difference for any outcome measures. Significance values for the Rivermead Motor Assessment ranged from p = 0.23 to p = 0.97 and for the Motor Assessment Scale from p = 0.29 to p = 0.87.
                There were no significant differences in movement abilities or functional independence between patients receiving a BB or an MSB intervention. Therefore the study did not show that one approach was more effective than the other in the treatment of stroke patients. The aim of this project was to assess whether outreach visits would improve the implementation of evidence based clinical practice in the area of falls reduction and stroke prevention in a residential care setting.
                Twenty facilities took part in a randomized controlled trial with a seven month follow-up period. Two outreach visits were delivered by a pharmacist. At the first a summary of the relevant evidence was provided and at the second detailed audit information was provided about fall rates, psychotropic drug prescribing and stroke risk reduction practices (BP monitoring, aspirin and warfarin use) for the facility relevant to the physician. The effect of the interventions was determined via pre- and post-intervention case note audit. Outcomes included change in percentage patients at risk of falling who fell in a three month period prior to follow-up and changes in use of psychotropic medications. Chi-square tests, independent samples t-test, and logistic regression were used in the analysis.
                Data were available from case notes at baseline (n = 897) and seven months follow-up (n = 902), 452 residential care staff were surveyed and 121 physicians were involved with 61 receiving outreach visits. Pre-and post-intervention data were available for 715 participants. There were no differences between the intervention and control groups for the three month fall rate. We were unable to detect statistically significant differences between groups for the psychotropic drug use of the patients before or after the intervention. The exception was significantly greater use of "as required" antipsychotics in the intervention group compared with the control group after the pharmacy intervention (RR = 4.95; 95%CI 1.69-14.50). There was no statistically significant difference between groups for the numbers of patients "at risk of stroke" on aspirin at follow-up.
                While the strategy was well received by the physicians involved, there was no change in prescribing patterns. Patient care in residential settings is complex and involves contributions from the patient's physician, family and residential care staff. The project highlights challenges of delivering evidence based care in a setting in which there is a paucity of well controlled trial evidence but where significant health outcomes can be attained. Effectiveness studies have tested interventions to improve quality of care for depression in primary care, but none, to our knowledge, have been completed for panic disorder (PD) in this setting. This study sought to test the clinical effectiveness of PD pharmacotherapy embedded in a disease management framework of "collaborative care" (CC).
                One hundred fifteen patients with PD from 3 primary care clinics were randomized to CC or "usual care" (UC). Patients in CC (n = 57) received educational videotapes and pamphlets; pharmacotherapy with the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor paroxetine; 2 psychiatrist visits and 2 telephone calls in the first 8 weeks; and up to 5 telephone calls between 3 and 12 months' follow-up. Usual care patients (n = 58) were treated by their primary care physician. Telephone assessments of panic, anxiety sensitivity, depression, and disability variables were performed at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months' follow-up. Adequacy of pharmacotherapy was assessed with an algorithm based on a review of efficacy studies.
                Patients in CC were more likely to receive adequate (type, dose, duration) medication and more likely to adhere to this medication at 3 and 6 months. Random regression analyses showed that CC patients improved significantly more over time compared with UC patients on anxiety, depression, and disability measures, with the greatest effects at 3 and 6 months.
                Compared with UC, CC interventions significantly improved both quality of care and clinical and functional outcomes in primary care PD patients. Clinical differences were greatest in the first 6 months, corresponding to the greater quality of care and the greater intensity of intervention. To determine if the combination of levodopa (LD) plus bromocriptine (Br) in the early stages of Parkinson's disease (PD) permits reduction of LD dosage and consequently results in fewer motor fluctuations and dyskinesias, a double-blind, multicenter prospective study in 50 PD patients who had responded favorably to LD while under treatment with that drug for < or = 6 months was undertaken. Patients were randomized into two parallel groups (LD alone and LD plus Br). During the first placebo-controlled stage of the study lasting 8 months, association of a fixed dose of Br (15 mg/day) in the LD regimen did not allow a significant reduction in the daily LD dose. Still, in patients on combined LD plus Br, there was a tendency toward smaller daily requirements of LD as compared with those on LD alone, and the difference in LD dose between the two groups was significantly different (515.4 +/- 240 vs. 725.6 +/- 230 mg/day; p < 0.01) after 44 months of continuous treatment in the 40 patients still enrolled in the open-label stage. At that point in time, the mean dose of Br had been increased by 9.2 mg in the combined treatment group, and the mean dose of LD was 40.7% lower than in the group receiving LD alone. On subsequent evaluations, the number of patients with dyskinesias or describing wearing-off fluctuations severe enough to require changes in treatment was lower than in the group under combined therapy, the differences being significant after 20 and 44 months, respectively (36.8 vs. 9.5 and 47.3 vs. 14.2%). Our results support early combined LD-Br therapy in PD, but no conclusions can be drawn as to whether this dopamine agonist exerts a preventive effect on the late side effects of LD or has another mechanism of action. Robot-assisted therapy (RT) is a current promising intervention in stroke rehabilitation, but more research is warranted for examining its efficacy and the dose-benefit relation. The authors investigated the effects of higher intensity versus lower intensity RT on movements of forearm pronation-supination and wrist flexion-extension relative to conventional rehabilitation (CR) in patients poststroke for a mean of 21 months.
                In this pilot study, 18 patients with initial mean Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA) of 37 to 44 for the upper extremity were randomized to higher intensity RT, lower intensity RT, or CR intervention for 4 weeks. The dose of the higher intensity RT was twice the number of repetitions in the lower intensity RT. Outcome measures at pretreatment and posttreatment were administered to patients to evaluate beneficial and adverse effects of interventions. Primary outcomes were the FMA and Medical Research Council scale.
                There were significant differences in motor function (P = .04) and daily performance (P = .03) among the 3 groups. The higher intensity RT group showed better improvement in motor function, muscle strength, performance of daily activities, and bimanual ability than the other 2 groups. The intensive RT intervention did not induce higher levels of an oxidative DNA biomarker.
                Higher intensity of RT that assists forearm and wrist movements may lead to greater improvement in motor ability and functional performance in stroke patients. A sample size of only 20 to 25 in each arm of a larger randomized controlled trial is needed to confirm the findings for similar subjects.
This review highlights major methodological problems and sources of heterogeneity that not only hamper the comparability of trials but also preclude a conclusion on the efficacy of BR in the adjunct treatment of PD patients with motor complications.