Purpose: To characterise the assessments and treatments that comprise “usual care” for stroke patients with somatosensory loss, and whether usual care has changed over time. Materials and methods: Comparison of cross-sectional, observational data from (1) Stroke Foundation National Audit of Acute (2007–2019) and Rehabilitation (2010–2018) Stroke Services and (2) the SENSe Implement multi-site knowledge translation study with occupational therapists and physiotherapists (n = 115). Descriptive statistics, random effects logistic regression, and content analysis were used. Results: Acute hospitals (n = 172) contributed 24 996 cases across audits from 2007 to 2019 (median patient age 76 years, 54% male). Rehabilitation services (n = 134) contributed organisational survey data from 2010 to 2014, with 7165 cases (median 76 years, 55% male) across 2016–2018 clinical audits (n = 127 services). Somatoensory assessment protocol use increased from 53% (2007) to 86% (2019) (odds ratio 11.4, 95% CI 5.0–25.6). Reported use of sensory-specific retraining remained stable over time (90–93%). Therapist practice reports for n = 86 patients with somatosensory loss revealed 16% did not receive somatosensory rehabilitation. The most common treatment approaches were sensory rehabilitation using everyday activities (69%), sensory re-education (68%), and compensatory strategies (64%). Conclusion: Sensory assessment protocol use has increased over time while sensory-specific training has remained stable. Sensory rehabilitation in the context of everyday activities is a common treatment approach. Clinical trial registration number: ACTRN12615000933550IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATION Only a small proportion of upper limb assessments conducted with stroke patients focus specifically on sensation; increased use of standardised upper limb assessments for sensory loss is needed. Stroke patients assessed as having upper limb sensory loss frequently do not receive treatment for their deficits. Therapists typically use everyday activities to treat upper limb sensory loss and may require upskilling in sensory-specific retraining to benefit patients.
Funding
This work was supported by National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) of Australia partnership grants: A network of sites and "up-skilled" therapists to deliver best practice stroke rehabilitation of the upper limb (GNT 1134495) and Ideas grant: Staying connected: personalising stroke recovery and rehabilitation through new technologies for people with stroke living at home (GNT143480). LSC and YMY are supported by La Trobe University Post-Graduate Scholarships. NAL is supported by a Future Leader Fellowship (102055) from the National Heart Foundation of Australia. DC is supported by a research fellowship from the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) (1063761 co-funded by the Heart Foundation; 1154273). DAO is supported by an NHMRC Translating Research into Practice Fellowship (GNT 1168749).
History
Publication Date
2022-10-01
Journal
Disability and Rehabilitation
Volume
44
Issue
21
Pagination
9p. (p. 6462-6470)
Publisher
Taylor & Francis
ISSN
0963-8288
Rights Statement
This is an Accepted Manuscript version of the following article, accepted for publication in Disability and Rehabilitation. Liana S. Cahill, Natasha A. Lannin, Tara Purvis, Dominique A. Cadilhac, Yvonne Mak-Yuen, Denise A. O’Connor & Leeanne M. Carey (2022) What is “usual care” in the rehabilitation of upper limb sensory loss after stroke? Results from a national audit and knowledge translation study, Disability and Rehabilitation, 44:21, 6462-6470, DOI: 10.1080/09638288.2021.1964620. It is deposited under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited