Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ahro.austin.org.au/austinjspui/handle/1/34290
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorZingelman, Sally-
dc.contributor.authorWallace, Sarah J-
dc.contributor.authorKim, Joosup-
dc.contributor.authorMosalski, Simon-
dc.contributor.authorFaux, Steven G-
dc.contributor.authorCadilhac, Dominique A-
dc.contributor.authorAlexander, Tara-
dc.contributor.authorLannin, Natasha A-
dc.contributor.authorOlaiya, Muideen T-
dc.contributor.authorClifton, Ross-
dc.contributor.authorShiner, Christine T-
dc.contributor.authorStarr, Susan-
dc.contributor.authorKilkenny, Monique F-
dc.date2023-
dc.date.accessioned2023-12-01T00:37:41Z-
dc.date.available2023-12-01T00:37:41Z-
dc.date.issued2023-11-15-
dc.identifier.citationTopics in Stroke Rehabilitation 2023-11-15en_US
dc.identifier.issn1945-5119-
dc.identifier.urihttps://ahro.austin.org.au/austinjspui/handle/1/34290-
dc.description.abstractInformation on the characteristics or long-term outcomes of people with communication support needs post-stroke is limited. We investigated associations between communication gains in rehabilitation and long-term outcomes (quality-of-life [EuroQOL-ED-3 L], mortality) by post-stroke communication support need status. Retrospective cohort study using person-level linked data from the Australian Stroke Clinical Registry and the Australasian Rehabilitation Outcomes Centre (2014-2017). Communication support needs were assessed using the Functional Independence Measure™ comprehension and expression items recorded on admission indicated by scores one (total assistance) to five (standby prompting). Multivariable multilevel and Cox regression models were used to determine associations with long-term outcomes. Of 8,394 patients who received in-patient rehabilitation after stroke (42% female, median age 75.6 years), two-thirds had post-stroke communication support needs. Having aphasia (odds ratio [OR] 4.34, 95% CI 3.67-5.14), being aged ≥65 years (OR 1.21, 95% CI 1.08-1.36), greater stroke severity (unable to walk on admission; OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.32-1.68) and previous stroke (OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.11-1.41) were associated with increased likelihoods of having communication support needs. One-point improvement in FIM™ expression was associated with reduced likelihood of self-reporting problems related to mobility (OR 0.85, 95% CI: 0.80-0.90), self-care (OR 0.79, 95% CI: 0.74-0.86) or usual activities (OR 0.84, 95% CI: 0.75-0.94) at 90-180 days. Patients with communication support needs had greater mortality rates within one-year post-stroke (adjusted hazard ratio 1.99, 95% CI: 1.65-2.39). Two-thirds of patients with stroke require communication support to participate in healthcare activities. Establishing communication-accessible stroke care environments is a priority.en_US
dc.language.isoeng-
dc.subjectRehabilitationen_US
dc.subjectcommunication disordersen_US
dc.subjectdata linkageen_US
dc.subjectmortalityen_US
dc.subjectquality of lifeen_US
dc.subjectregistryen_US
dc.subjectstrokeen_US
dc.titleIs communication key in stroke rehabilitation and recovery? National linked stroke data study.en_US
dc.typeJournal Articleen_US
dc.identifier.journaltitleTopics in Stroke Rehabilitationen_US
dc.identifier.affiliationQueensland Aphasia Research Centre, School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Australia.;Surgical Treatment and Rehabilitation Service (STARS) Education and Research Alliance, The University of Queensland and Metro North Health, St Lucia, Australia.;Centre of Research Excellence in Aphasia Recovery and Rehabilitation, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia.en_US
dc.identifier.affiliationQueensland Aphasia Research Centre, School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Australia.;Surgical Treatment and Rehabilitation Service (STARS) Education and Research Alliance, The University of Queensland and Metro North Health, St Lucia, Australia.;Centre of Research Excellence in Aphasia Recovery and Rehabilitation, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia.en_US
dc.identifier.affiliationStroke and Ageing Research, Department of Medicine, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Monash University, Clayton, Australia.;Stroke Division, The Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health, Heidelberg, Australia.en_US
dc.identifier.affiliationThe Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Healthen_US
dc.identifier.affiliationDepartment of Rehabilitation, St Vincent's Hospital, Sydney, Australia.en_US
dc.identifier.affiliationCentre of Research Excellence in Aphasia Recovery and Rehabilitation, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia.;Stroke and Ageing Research, Department of Medicine, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Monash University, Clayton, Australia.en_US
dc.identifier.affiliationAustralasian Rehabilitation Outcomes Centre, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia.en_US
dc.identifier.affiliationCentre of Research Excellence in Aphasia Recovery and Rehabilitation, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia.;Department of Neuroscience, Central Clinical School, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.;Occupational Therapy Department, Alfred Health, Melbourne, Australia.en_US
dc.identifier.affiliationStroke and Ageing Research, Department of Medicine, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Monash University, Clayton, Australia.en_US
dc.identifier.affiliationAustralasian Rehabilitation Outcomes Centre, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia.en_US
dc.identifier.affiliationDepartment of Rehabilitation, St Vincent's Hospital, Sydney, Australia.en_US
dc.identifier.affiliationDepartment of Speech Pathology, Braeside Hospital, Sydney, Australia.en_US
dc.identifier.affiliationSchool of Clinical Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.en_US
dc.identifier.affiliationSchool of Medicine, Sydney Campus, The University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, New South Wales, Australia.en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1080/10749357.2023.2279804en_US
dc.type.contentTexten_US
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0003-0599-5708en_US
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0002-0600-9343en_US
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0002-4079-0428en_US
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0002-0811-3814en_US
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0001-8846-216Xen_US
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0001-8162-682Xen_US
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0001-5234-7821en_US
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0002-2066-8345en_US
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0002-4070-0533en_US
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0002-6202-7976en_US
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0001-9891-3307en_US
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0002-3375-287Xen_US
dc.identifier.pubmedid37965905-
dc.description.startpage1-
dc.description.endpage11-
item.fulltextNo Fulltext-
item.grantfulltextnone-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.languageiso639-1en-
item.openairetypeJournal Article-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_18cf-
Appears in Collections:Journal articles
Show simple item record

Page view(s)

52
checked on Apr 4, 2025

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in AHRO are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.