This study provided Class III evidence that tri-pull shoulder taping was ineffective in significantly reducing shoulder pain in patients with acute stoke.
BackgroundSensory modulation rooms (SMRs) are therapeutic spaces that use sensory modulation concepts and strategies to assist service users to self-regulate and modulate arousal levels. SMRs are increasingly being explored as strength-based and person-centered adjuncts to care for people receiving inpatient psychiatry services. The aim of this study is to understand health provider and inpatient service user perceptions on the use of SMRs on acute psychiatric units.MethodsWe conducted semi-structured interviews with ten service users and nine health providers (four occupational therapists and five nurses) regarding their experiences of the SMRs located on three acute inpatient units in a large urban tertiary care hospital. We audio recorded and transcribed the focus groups and used thematic analysis to analyze the data.ResultsOur results suggested four common themes amongst health provider and service user experiences of sensory modulation rooms: (1) service user empowerment through self-management, (2) emotional regulation, (3) an alternative to current practices, and (4) health provider and service user education.ConclusionOur study supports the ecological utility of SMRs as person-centred adjunct therapeutic space viewed positively by both service users and health providers. This understanding of SMRs is critical for future service design, research and policy aimed at improving the service user experience and care for this population. Future research is needed to validate the experience of the SMRs with other patient groups and health providers.
More than one-third of the patients in this study opted for CAM. Presence of limb weakness, dysphagia, dyslipidemia, hypertension, hemorrhagic stroke, severe stroke, and poor outcome predicted the use of CAM.
Direct medical cost or acute care of stroke accounted for a major component of cost of stroke. Poor outcome, length of hospital stay, and higher income were the cost driving factors. The socioeconomic impact on the family decreased at follow up probably due to joint family system.
Lower incidence of vascular events following small artery ischemic stroke Small artery infarction, which is particularly prevalent among Asians (1), carries a lower risk of recurrent stroke at one-month compared with other stroke subtypes, but long-term findings are inconsistent (2,3). Data on subsequent myocardial infarction risk after small artery stroke are limited. We compared the incidence of vascular events following ischemic stroke due to small artery disease vs. other etiologies among prospectively recruited Asian patients admitted to the Singapore General Hospital from 2005 to 2007. Telephone follow᎑up at a median of 30 months (IQR 24-34) masked to clinical information was obtained for 89% of the cohort. Among the 731 patients with known stroke etiology, 49% had small artery infarction, 38% had large artery infarction, 12% had cardioembolic, and 1% had other etiology. Figure 1 shows the cumulative incidence of subsequent vascular events. Using Cox regression adjusted for age, gender, hypertension, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, smoking, and atrial fibrillation, small artery infarction was associated with a lower incidence of recurrent stroke [hazard ratio (HR) 0•62; P = 0•047], myocardial infarction (HR 0•45; P = 0•031), vascular death (HR 0•18; P = 0•002), and composite vascular events (HR 0•59, P = 0•007) compared with nonsmall artery stroke. The lower risk of subsequent vascular events following small artery infarction may be explained by a differing underlying pathology from large artery and
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.