e98Purpose-The aim of this guideline is to provide a synopsis of best clinical practices in the rehabilitative care of adults recovering from stroke. Methods-Writing group members were nominated by the committee chair on the basis of their previous work in relevant topic areas and were approved by the American Heart Association (AHA) Stroke Council's Scientific Statement Oversight Committee and the AHA's Manuscript Oversight Committee. The panel reviewed relevant articles on adults using computerized searches of the medical literature through 2014. The evidence is organized within the context of the AHA framework and is classified according to the joint AHA/American College of Cardiology and supplementary AHA methods of classifying the level of certainty and the class and level of evidence. The document underwent extensive AHA internal and external peer review, Stroke Council Leadership review, and Scientific Statements Oversight Committee review before consideration and approval by the AHA Science Advisory and Coordinating Committee. Results-Stroke rehabilitation requires a sustained and coordinated effort from a large team, including the patient and his or her goals, family and friends, other caregivers (eg, personal care attendants), physicians, nurses, physical and occupational therapists, speech-language pathologists, recreation therapists, psychologists, nutritionists, social workers, and others. Communication and coordination among these team members are paramount in maximizing the effectiveness

No abstract

No abstract

for the Brain Attack CoalitionBackground and Purpose-To develop recommendations for the establishment of comprehensive stroke centers capable of delivering the full spectrum of care to seriously ill patients with stroke and cerebrovascular disease. Recommendations were developed by members of the Brain Attack Coalition (BAC), which is a multidisciplinary group of members from major professional organizations involved with the care of patients with stroke and cerebrovascular disease. Summary of Review-A comprehensive literature search was conducted from 1966 through December 2004 using Medline and Pub Med. Articles with information about clinical trials, meta-analyses, care guidelines, scientific guidelines, and other relevant clinical and research reports were examined and graded using established evidence-based medicine approaches for therapeutic and diagnostic modalities. Evidence was also obtained from a questionnaire survey sent to leaders in cerebrovascular disease. Members of BAC reviewed literature related to their field and graded the scientific evidence on the various diagnostic and treatment modalities for stroke. Input was obtained from the organizations represented by BAC. BAC met on several occasions to review each specific recommendation and reach a consensus about its importance in light of other medical, logistical, and financial factors. Conclusions-There are a number of key areas supported by evidence-based medicine that are important for a comprehensive stroke center and its ability to deliver the wide variety of specialized care needed by patients with serious cerebrovascular disease. These areas include: (1) health care personnel with specific expertise in a number of disciplines, including neurosurgery and vascular neurology; (2) advanced neuroimaging capabilities such as MRI and various types of cerebral angiography; (3) surgical and endovascular techniques, including clipping and coiling of intracranial aneurysms, carotid endarterectomy, and intra-arterial thrombolytic therapy; and (4) other specific infrastructure and programmatic elements such as an intensive care unit and a stroke registry. Integration of these elements into a coordinated hospital-based program or system is likely to improve outcomes of patients with strokes and complex cerebrovascular disease who require the services of a comprehensive stroke center. (Stroke. 2005;36:1597-1618.)

In 2005, the American Stroke Association published recommendations for the establishment of stroke systems of care and in 2013 expanded on them with a statement on interactions within stroke systems of care. The aim of this policy statement is to provide a comprehensive review of the scientific evidence evaluating stroke systems of care to date and to update the American Stroke Association recommendations on the basis of improvements in stroke systems of care. Over the past decade, stroke systems of care have seen vast improvements in endovascular therapy, neurocritical care, and stroke center certification, in addition to the advent of innovations, such as telestroke and mobile stroke units, in the context of significant changes in the organization of healthcare policy in the United States. This statement provides an update to prior publications to help guide policymakers and public healthcare agencies in continually updating their stroke systems of care in light of these changes. This statement and its recommendations span primordial and primary prevention, acute stroke recognition and activation of emergency medical services, triage to appropriate facilities, designation of and treatment at stroke centers, secondary prevention at hospital discharge, and rehabilitation and recovery.

No abstract

Among the estimated 20% to 40% of stroke survivors who develop spasticity, the burden of this condition on patients, caregivers, and society is substantial. Stroke survivors with spasticity may experience reductions in their ability to perform activities of daily living and in their health-related quality of life. The occurrence of spasticity in stroke survivors may also result in an increased burden on their caregivers, who exhibit poorer physical and emotional health as compared with the general population. The responsibilities that caregivers have to the stroke survivor--in terms of providing medical care, protecting from falls, and assisting with feeding and hygiene, among other tasks of daily living--must be balanced with their responsibilities to other family members and to themselves. Caregivers of stroke survivors often report a feeling of confinement with little opportunity for relief, and although social support can be helpful, it is frequently limited in its availability. In terms of the socioeconomic burden of spasticity after stroke, recent data point to a 4-fold increase in health care costs associated with stroke survivors with spasticity compared with stroke survivors without spasticity. Thus, it is important to reduce the burden of spasticity after stroke. Consequently, effective spasticity treatment that reduces spasticity and the level of disability experienced by stroke survivors will likely increase their functioning and their health-related quality of life and will also result in a diminished burden on their caregivers.

No abstract