The development of a clinical practice stroke guideline for physiotherapists in The Netherlands: A systematic review of available evidence

References

• Koek H L, Van Dis S J, Peters R JG, Bots M L. Hart-en vaatziekten in Nederland. Hart-en vaatziekten in Nederland 2005, cijfers over risicofactoren, ziekte, behandeling en sterfte [Dutch], L ATM Van Leest, H L Koek, M JCA Van Trijp, S J Van Dis, R JG Peters, M L Bots. Nederlandse Hartstichting, Den Haag 2005; 6–12
   Google Scholar
• Dutch Institute for Quality in Health Care [in Dutch: Kwaliteitsinstituut voor de gezondheidszorg Utrecht-CBO-]. Nederlandse Hartstichting, Den Haag, CBO Richtlijn Beroerte (Stroke Guidelines 2000, in Dutch)
   Google Scholar
• Commissie CVA-Revalidatie. Rehabilitation after a stroke, guidelines and recommendations for health care professionals (in Dutch: Revalidatie na een beroerte: richtlijnen en aanbevelingen voor zorgverleners). E AM Franke. Dutch Heart Foundation, Den Haag 2001, [in Dutch: Nederlandse Hartstichting];
   Google Scholar
• Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network. Management of patients with stroke, rehabilitation, prevention and management of complications and discharge planning – a national clinical guideline (no: 64). SIGN, Edinburgh 2002; 64
   Google Scholar
• Agency for Health Care Policy and Research. Post-Stroke Rehabilitation: Clinical practice guideline. No.16. AHCPR, Rockville 1995
   Google Scholar
• Royal College of Physicians – the intercollegiate working party for stroke. National Clinical Guidelines for Stroke. London 1999
   Google Scholar
• Sackett D L, Straus S E, Richardson W S, Rosenberg W, Haynes R B. Evidence-based medicine. How to practice and teach EBM2nd ed. Churchill Livingstone, Edinburgh 2000
   Google Scholar
• De Wit L, Putman K, Dejaeger E, Baert I, Berman P, Bogaerts K, et al. Use of time by stroke patients: A comparison of four European rehabilitation centers. Stroke 2005; 36(9)1977–1983
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jette D U, Latham N K, Smout R J, Gassaway J, Slavin M D, Horn S D. Physical therapy interventions for patients with stroke in inpatient rehabilitation facilities. Phys Ther 2005; 85(3)238–248
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Peppen R PS, Kwakkel G, Harmeling B C, Kollen B J, Hobbelen J SM, Buurke J H, et al. Clinical Practice Guideline in Physiotherapy-management of patients with Stroke [in Dutch: KNGF-richtlijn Beroerte]. Ned Tijdschr v Fysioth 2004; 114(5:suppl.)1–78
   Google Scholar
• PEDro. The Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro). 2004, http://www.pedro.fhs.usyd.edu.au/
   Google Scholar
• van Peppen R P, Kwakkel G, Wood-Dauphinee S, Hendriks H J, Van der Wees P J, Dekker J. The impact of physical therapy on functional outcomes after stroke: What's the evidence?. Clin Rehabil 2004; 18(8)833–862
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WHO. Stroke – 1989. Recommendations on stroke prevention, diagnosis, and therapy. Report of the WHO Task Force on Stroke and other Cerebrovascular Disorders. Stroke 1989; 20(10)1407–1431
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kwakkel G, Wagenaar R C, Kollen B J, Lankhorst G J. Predicting disability in stroke – a critical review of the literature. Age Ageing 1996; 25(6)479–489
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meijer R, Ihnenfeldt D S, de Groot I J, van Limbeek J, Vermeulen M, de Haan R J. Prognostic factors for ambulation and activities of daily living in the subacute phase after stroke. A systematic review of the literature. Clin Rehabil 2003; 17(2)119–129
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WHO. ICF-introduction, the International Classification of Functioning Disability and Health. Geneve 2001, http://www.who.int/classification/icf/intros/ICF-Eng-Intro.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Streiner D L, Norman G R. Health measurement scales, a practical guide to their development and use2nd ed. Oxford University Press, New York 2003
   Google Scholar
• Bot S D, Terwee C B, van der Windt D A, Bouter L M, Dekker J, de Vet H C. Clinimetric evaluation of shoulder disability questionnaires: A systematic review of the literature. Ann Rheum Dis 2004; 63(4)335–341
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Counsell C, Dennis M. Systematic review of prognostic models in patients with acute stroke. Cerebrovasc Dis 2001; 12(3)159–170
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dombovy M L, Sandok B A, Basford J R. Rehabilitation for stroke: A review. Stroke 1986; 17(3)363–369
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jongbloed L. Prediction of function after stroke: A critical review. Stroke 1986; 17(4)765–776
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meijer R, Ihnenfeldt D S, van Limbeek J, Vermeulen M, de Haan R J. Prognostic factors in the subacute phase after stroke for the future residence after six months to one year. A systematic review of the literature. Clin Rehabil 2003; 17(5)512–520
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berg K, Wood-Dauphinee S, Williams J I. The Balance Scale: Reliability assessment with elderly residents and patients with an acute stroke. Scand J Rehabil Med 1995; 27(1)27–36
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Blackburn M, van Vliet P, Mockett S P. Reliability of measurements obtained with the modified Ashworth scale in the lower extremities of people with stroke. Phys Ther 2002; 82(1)25–34
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bohannon R W, Larkin P A, Cook A C, Gear J, Singer J. Decrease in timed balance test scores with aging. Phys Ther 1984; 64(7)1067–1070
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Butland R J, Pang J, Gross E R, Woodcock A A, Geddes D M. Two-, six-, and 12-minute walking tests in respiratory disease. BMJ (Clin Res Ed) 1982; 284(6329)1607–1608
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collen F M, Wade D T, Robb G F, Bradshaw C M. The Rivermead Mobility Index: A further development of the Rivermead Motor Assessment. Int Disabil Stud 1991; 13(2)50–54
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Collin C, Wade D T, Davies S, Horne V. The Barthel ADL Index: A reliability study. Int Disabil Stud 1988; 10(2)61–63
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Collin C, Wade D. Assessing motor impairment after stroke: A pilot reliability study. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1990; 53(7)576–579
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crow J L, Harmeling B C. Development of a consensus and evidence-based standardised clinical assessment and record form for neurological inpatients: the Neuro Dataset. Physiotherapy 2002; 88(1)33–46
   Google Scholar
• de Haan R J. Clinimetrics in stroke. Dept. Clin. Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam 1994
   Google Scholar
• De Weerdt W. Patienten met neurologische aandoeningen. Deel 1: handleiding voor het functioneel onderzoek. Acco, Leuven (België) 2001
   Google Scholar
• Demeurisse G, Demol O, Robaye E. Motor evaluation in vascular hemiplegia. Eur Neurol 1980; 19(6)382–389
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeSouza L H, Langton-Hewer R, Miller S. Assessment of recovery of arm control in hemiplegic stroke patients. Arm function test. Int Rehabil Med 1980; 2: 3–9
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Franchignoni F P, Tesio L, Ricupero C, Martino M T. Trunk control test as an early predictor of stroke rehabilitation outcome. Stroke 1997; 28(7)1382–1385
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fugl-Meyer A R, Jaasko L, Leyman I, Olsson S, Steglind S. The post-stroke hemiplegic patient. 1. A method for evaluation of physical performance. Scand J Rehabil Med 1975; 7(1)13–31
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Heller A, Wade D T, Wood V A, Sunderland A, Hewer R L, Ward E. Arm function after stroke: Measurement and recovery over the first three months. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1987; 50(6)714–719
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hellstrom K, Lindmark B. Fear of falling in patients with stroke: A reliability study. Clin Rehabil 1999; 13(6)509–517
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hellstrom K, Lindmark B, Fugl-Meyer A. The Falls-Efficacy Scale, Swedish version: Does it reflect clinically meaningful changes after stroke?. Disabil Rehabil 2002; 24(9)471–481
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holden M K, Gill K M, Magliozzi M R, Nathan J, Piehl-Baker L. Clinical gait assessment in the neurologically impaired. Reliability and meaningfulness. Phys Ther 1984; 64: 35–40
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holden M K, Gill K M, Magliozzi M R. Gait assessment for neurologically impaired patients. Standards for outcome assessment. Phys Ther 1986; 66: 1530–1539
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Joos E, Peretz A, Beguin S, Famaey J P. Reliability and reproducibility of visual analogue scale and numeric rating scale for therapeutic evaluation of pain in rheumatic patients. J Rheumatol 1991; 18(8)1269–1270
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kwakkel G, Wagenaar R C, Twisk J W, Lankhorst G J, Koetsier J C. Intensity of leg and arm training after primary middle-cerebral-artery stroke: A randomised trial. Lancet 1999; 354(9174)191–196
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lincoln N B, Jackson J M, Adams S A. Reliability and revision of the Nottingham sensory assessment for stroke patients. Physiotherapy 1998; 84(8)358–365
   Google Scholar
• Lyle R C. A performance test for assessment of upper limb function in physical rehabilitation treatment and research. Int J Rehabil Res 1981; 4(4)483–492
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nouri F M, Lincoln N B. An extended activities of daily living scale for stroke patients. Clin Rehabil 1987; 1: 301–305
   Google Scholar
• Oerlemans H M, Goris R J, Oostendorp R A. Impairment level sumscore in reflex sympathetic dystrophy of one upper extremity. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1998; 79(8)979–990
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Podsiadlo D, Richardson S. The timed ‘Up & Go’: a test of basic functional mobility for frail elderly persons. J Am Geriatr Soc 1991; 39(2)142–148
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ryf C, Weymann A. Range of Motion – AO Neutral-0-Method; measurement and documentation. Thieme, Stutgart 1999
   Google Scholar
• Schuling J, de Haan R, Limburg M, Groenier K H. The Frenchay Activities Index. Assessment of functional status in stroke patients. Stroke 1993; 24(8)1173–1177
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stevenson T J. Detecting change in patients with stroke using the Berg Balance Scale. Aust J Physiother 2001; 47(1)29–38
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Swieten J C, Koudstaal P J, Visser M C, Schouten H J, Van Gijn J. Interobserver agreement for the assessment of handicap in stroke patients. Stroke 1988; 19(5)604–607
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verheyden G, Nieuwboer A, Mertin J, Preger R, Kiekens C, De Weerdt W. The Trunk Impairment Scale: A new tool to measure motor impairment of the trunk after stroke. Clin Rehabil 2004; 18(3)326–334
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wade D T. Measurements in neurological rehabilitation. Oxford University Press, Oxford 1992
   Google Scholar
• Kwakkel G, Kollen B J, Van der Grond J, Prevo A J. Probability of regaining dexterity in the flaccid upper limb: Impact of severity of paresis and time since onset in acute stroke. Stroke 2003; 34(9)2181–2186
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sunderland A, Tinson D, Bradley L, Hewer R L. Arm function after stroke. An evaluation of grip strength as a measure of recovery and a prognostic indicator. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1989; 52(11)1267–1272
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wade D T, Langton-Hewer R, Wood V A, Skilbeck C E, Ismail H M. The hemiplegic arm after stroke: Measurement and recovery. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1983; 46(6)521–524
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kwakkel G, van Dijk G M, Wagenaar R C. Accuracy of physical and occupational therapists' early predictions of recovery after severe middle cerebral artery stroke. Clin Rehabil 2000; 14(1)28–41
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salter K, Jutai J W, Teasell R, Foley N C, Bitensky J, Bayley M. Issues for selection of outcome measures in stroke rehabilitation: ICF activity. Disabil Rehabil 2005; 27(6)315–340
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bohannon R W, Smith M B. Interrater reliability of a modified Ashworth scale of muscle spasticity. Phys Ther 1987; 67(2)206–207
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duncan P W, Zorowitz R, Bates B, Choi J Y, Glasberg J J, Graham G D, et al. Management of Adult Stroke Rehabilitation Care: A clinical practice guideline. Stroke 2005; 36(9)e100–e143
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jette D U, Bacon K, Batty C, Carlson M, Ferland A, Hemingway R D, et al. Evidence-based practice: Beliefs, attitudes, knowledge, and behaviors of physical therapists. Phys Ther 2003; 83(9)786–805
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Australian Physiotherapy Association. 2003, APA Position Statement – Clinical justification and outcome measures: https://apa.advsol.com.au/staticcontent/staticpages/position_statements/public/ClinicalJustification&Outcome%20Measures.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Jette A M. Assessing disability in studies on physical activity. Am J Prev Med 2003; 25(3 Suppl 2)122–128
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haynes R B, Devereaux P J, Guyatt G H. Clinical expertise in the era of evidence-based medicine and patient choice. Vox Sang 2002; 83(Suppl. 1)383–386
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hendriks H JM, Bekkering G E, van Ettekoven H, Brandsma J W, Van der Wees P J, de Bie R A. Development and implementation of national practice guidelines: A prospect for continuous quality improvement in physiotherapy. Physiotherapy 2000; 86: 535–547
   Google Scholar
• Shaneyfelt T M, Mayo-Smith M F, Rothwangl J. Are guidelines following guidelines? The methodological quality of clinical practice guidelines in the peer-reviewed medical literature. JAMA 1999; 281(20)1900–1905
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The AGREE Collaboration. Appraisal of Guidelines Research & Evaluation (AGREE); Instrument voor beoordeling van richtlijnen. 2001
   Google Scholar
• Juni P, Witschi A, Bloch R, Egger M. The hazards of scoring the quality of clinical trials for meta-analysis. JAMA 1999; 282(11)1054–1060
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bhogal S K, Teasell R W, Foley N C, Speechley M R. The PEDro scale provides a more comprehensive measure of methodological quality than the Jadad scale in stroke rehabilitation literature. J Clin Epidemiol 2005; 58(7)668–673
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kollen B, Van de Port I, Lindeman E, Twisk J, Kwakkel G. Predicting improvement in gait after stroke: A longitudinal prospective study. Stroke 2005; 36(12)2676–2680
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van de Port I, Kwakkel G, van W I, Lindeman E. Susceptibility to deterioration of mobility long-term after stroke: A prospective cohort study. Stroke 2006; 37(1)167–171
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davidoff F. In the teeth of the evidence: The curious case of evidence based medicine. Mt Sinai J Med 1999; 66(2)75–83
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grol R, Wensing M, Eccles M. Improvement patient care. The implementation of change in clinical practice. Elsevier Butterworth Heinemann, London 2005
   Google Scholar
• Devereaux P J, Bhandari M, Clarke M, Montori V M, Cook D J, Yusuf S, et al. Need for expertise based randomised controlled trials. BMJ 2005; 330(7482)88
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hotopf M. The pragmatic randomised controlled trial. Advances in Psychiatric Treatment 2002; 8: 326–333
   Google Scholar
• Tunis S R, Stryer D B, Clancy C M. Practical clinical trials: Increasing the value of clinical research for decision making in clinical and health policy. JAMA 2003; 290(12)1624–1632
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kwakkel G, Wagenaar R C. Effect of duration of upper- and lower-extremity rehabilitation sessions and walking speed on recovery of interlimb coordination in hemiplegic gait. Phys Ther 2002; 82(5)432–448
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scholz J P. Dynamic pattern theory – some implications for therapeutics. Phys Ther 1990; 70(12)827–843
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnston M, Pollard B, Morrison V, MacWalter R. Functional limitations and survival following stroke: Psychological and clinical predictors of 3-year outcome. Int J Behav Med 2004; 11(4)187–196
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gresham G E, Duncan P W, Statson W B. Priorities for future research: Clinical practice guidelines, number 16. AHCPR, Rockville 1995, US Dept Health and Human Services – Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, editor
   Google Scholar
• Teasell R W, Foley N C, Bhogal S K, Speechley M R. An evidence-based review of stroke rehabilitation. Top Stroke Rehabil 2003; 10(1)29–58
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hanger H C, Wilkinson T, Keeling S, Sainbury R. New Zealand guideline for management of stroke. NZ Med J 2004; 117(1192)U863
   Google Scholar
• Hammond R, Lennon S, Walker M F, Hoffman A, Irwin P, Lowe D. Changing occupational therapy and physiotherapy practice through guidelines and audit in the United Kingdom. Clin Rehabil 2005; 19(4)365–371
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wade D. Investigating the effectiveness of rehabilitation professions – a misguided enterprise?. Clin Rehabil 2005; 19(1)1–3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Michie S, Johnston M. Changing clinical behaviour by making guidelines specific. BMJ 2004; 328(7435)343–345
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Geurts A C, Halfens J HC, Buurke J H, Kwakkel G. Implementatie van nieuwe klinische inzichten in studies over herstel van loopvaardigheid na een CVA. Grant ZonMW 2006, projectnr: 1435.0047
   Google Scholar
• Kwakkel G, Kollen B, Lindeman E. Understanding the pattern of functional recovery after stroke: Facts and theories. Restor Neurol Neurosci 2004; 22(3 – 5)281–299
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vlaeyen J W, Morley S. Cognitive-behavioral treatments for chronic pain: what works for whom?. Clin J Pain 2005; 21(1)1–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Craik R L. Thirty-Sixth Mary McMillan Lecture: Never satisfied. Phys Ther 2005; 85(11)1224–1237
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Glasziou P, Irwig L, Mant D. Monitoring in chronic disease: A rational approach. BMJ 2005; 330(7492)644–648
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jette A M. Outcomes research: shifting the dominant research paradigm in physical therapy. Phys Ther 1995; 75(11)965–970
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kwakkel G. Dynamics in functional recovery after stroke. WageningenThe Netherlands 1998
   Google Scholar
• Koolstra M, Smeets C J, Harmeling B C, Kwakkel G. Clinimetrics after stroke [in Dutch: Klinimetrie na een beroerte]2nd ed. NPi en VUmc, Amersfoort 2004
   Google Scholar