Tomas Vetrovsky
57196038086
Publications - 2
Comparison of Five Rehabilitation Interventions for Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Randomized Trial
Publication Name: Journal of Clinical Medicine
Publication Date: 2025-03-01
Volume: 14
Issue: 5
Page Range: Unknown
Description:
Background: Comparative efficacy of rehabilitation interventions in persons with acute ischemic stroke (PwS) is limited. This randomized trial assessed the immediate and lasting effects of five interventions on clinical and mobility outcomes in 75 PwS. Methods: Five days after stroke, 75 PwS were randomized into five groups: physical therapy (CON, standard care, once daily); walking with a soft robotic exoskeleton (ROB, once daily); agility exergaming once (EXE1, once daily) or twice daily (EXE2, twice daily); and combined EXE1+ROB in two daily sessions. Interventions were performed 5 days per week for 3 weeks. Outcomes were assessed at baseline, post-intervention, and after 5 weeks of detraining. Results: Modified Rankin Scale (primary outcome) and Barthel Index showed no changes. EXE1, EXE2, ROB, and EXE1+ROB outperformed standard care (CON) in five secondary outcomes (Berg balance scale, 10m walking speed, 6-min walk test with/without robot, standing balance), with effects sustained after 5 weeks. Dose effects (EXE1 vs. EXE2) were minimal, while EXE1+ROB showed additive effects in 6-min walk tests. Conclusions: These novel comparative data expand evidence-based options for therapists to design individualized rehabilitation plans for PwS. Further confirmation is needed.
Open Access: Yes
DOI: 10.3390/jcm14051648
Walking on a Balance Beam as a New Measure of Dynamic Balance to Predict Falls in Older Adults and Patients with Neurological Conditions
Publication Name: Sports Medicine Open
Publication Date: 2024-12-01
Volume: 10
Issue: 1
Page Range: Unknown
Description:
Background: Beam walking is a new test to estimate dynamic balance. We characterized dynamic balance measured by the distance walked on beams of different widths in five age groups of healthy adults (20, 30, 40, 50, 60 years) and individuals with neurological conditions (i.e., Parkinson, multiple sclerosis, stroke, age: 66.9 years) and determined if beam walking distance predicted prospective falls over 12 months. Methods: Individuals with (n = 97) and without neurological conditions (n = 99, healthy adults, age 20–60) participated in this prospective longitudinal study. Falls analyses over 12 months were conducted. The summed distance walked under single (walking only) and dual-task conditions (walking and serial subtraction by 7 between 300 to 900) on three beams (4, 8, and 12-cm wide) was used in the analyses. Additional functional tests comprised grip strength and the Short Physical Performance Battery. Results: Beam walking distance was unaffected on the 12-cm-wide beam in the healthy adult groups. The distance walked on the 8-cm-wide beam decreased by 0.34 m in the 20-year-old group. This reduction was ~ 3 × greater, 1.1 m, in the 60-year-old group. In patients, beam walking distances decreased sharply by 0.8 m on the 8 versus 12 cm beam and by additional 1.6 m on the 4 versus 8 cm beam. Beam walking distance under single and dual-task conditions was linearly but weakly associated with age (R2 = 0.21 for single task, R2 = 0.27 for dual-task). Age, disease, and beam width affected distance walked on the beam. Beam walking distance predicted future falls in the combined population of healthy adults and patients with neurological conditions. Based on receiver operating characteristic curve analyses using data from the entire study population, walking ~ 8.0 of the 12 m maximum on low-lying beams predicted future fallers with reasonable accuracy. Conclusion: Balance beam walking is a new but worthwhile measure of dynamic balance to predict falls in the combined population of healthy adults and patients with neurological conditions. Future studies are needed to evaluate the predictive capability of beam walking separately in more homogenous populations. Clinical Trial Registration Number NCT03532984.
Open Access: Yes