Citation

Rice-Oxley M, Turner-Stokes L. Clin. Rehabil. 1999; 13(Suppl 1): 7-24.

Affiliation

St Richard's Hospital, Chichester, West Sussex, UK.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1999, SAGE Publishing)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

10685619

Abstract

Despite the problems posed by diversity of condition and the lack of agreement among researchers over what outcome to measure, there is now increasingly robust evidence for the effectiveness of rehabilitation in brain-injured populations. Meta-analysis has demonstrated clearly that stroke units provide a better outcome than management on a general medical ward, at the level of survival, discharge destination and dependency. The extent of this advantage may be summarized in the following terms. For every 100 patients treated in a stroke unit, four deaths and two institutional admissions are avoided, and five patients are discharged home. This benefit appears to arise from a combination of good-quality acute management and the coordinated input of a multidisciplinary team. Therapy programmes are shown to be of benefit and intensive therapy programmes of somewhat greater benefit. Smaller numbers and heterogeneity among the head-injured population tend to confound randomized controlled trial designs, but there is no good reason to suppose that brain injury resulting from trauma should be less responsive to similar good management principles than that arising from stroke. In any event, we have progressed to a stage where the weight of evidence supports the notion that rehabilitation is effective, and nontreatment controls are ethically no longer acceptable. It is time now to unravel the threads of rehabilitation and consider which are the critical components. There are still many opportunities for comparison of different models for delivery of care, and the existing evidence for these is discussed.

Language: en