PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Kitty R M Streppel

Publications and source records attributed to Kitty R M Streppel.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

The Functional Independence Measure used in a Dutch rehabilitating stroke population; a pilot study to assess progress.

In contrast to the United States, the Functional Independence Measure (FIM) is seldom used in Dutch rehabilitation settings. The purpose of this study was to determine if the FIM could be used in a Dutch stroke population to assess progress during rehabilitation. Patients with a recent stroke who received inpatient treatment were included in this longitudinal pilot study, which used the standard error of measurement (SEM) to quantify progress. Mean (SD) age of the subjects (n=48) was 61.3 (10.5) and 25 (56%%) were male. Mean (SD) length of stay (LOS) was 141.3 (75.0) days. For 42 subjects, admission and discharge scores of the FIM were registered. The mean admission (93.0, SD=23.3), as well as the discharge (112.4, SD=11.0) scores were rather high. The mean FIM difference (SD) between admission and discharge was 19.3 (16.9). However, only 55% exceeded a difference score of 13 points, indicating progress. Results of this pilot study confirm the ceiling effect of the FIM in this population. Based on the findings of our pilot study we conclude that the FIM is not suitable to assess progress in a Dutch rehabilitating stroke population.

Activities of Daily Living↗

Successfully improving physical activity behavior after rehabilitation.

PURPOSE: To determine the effects of the physical activity promotion programs Rehabilitation & Sports (R&S) and Active after Rehabilitation (AaR) on sport and daily physical activity 1 year after in- or outpatient rehabilitation. DESIGN: Subjects in intervention rehabilitation centers were randomized into a group receiving R&S only (n = 315) and a group receiving R&S and AaR (n = 284). Subjects in six control centers (n = 603) received usual care. SETTING: Ten Dutch rehabilitation centers. SUBJECTS: Subjects consisted of 1202 rehabilitation patients. Most frequent diagnoses were stroke, neurological disorders, and back disorders. INTERVENTION: Both the sport stimulation program (R&S) and the daily physical activity promotion program (AaR) consisted of personalized tailored counseling. MEASURES: Two sport outcomes and two daily physical activity outcomes were assessed with questionnaires at baseline and 1 year after rehabilitation. ANALYSIS: Multilevel analyses comparing both intervention groups to the control group. RESULTS: The R&S program showed no significant effects. Intention-to-treat analyses in the R&S + AaR group showed borderline significant improvements in one sport (odds ratio [OR] = 1.66, p = .02) and both physical activity outcomes (OR = 1.68, p = .01 and regression coefficient = 10.78, p = .05). On-treatment analyses in the R&S + AaR group showed similar but stronger effects. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of the R&S and AaR programs improved physical activity behavior and sport participation 1 year after in- or outpatient rehabilitation. The R&S program alone did not have any effects.

Adult↗