Stroke survivors' recommendations for the visual representation of movement analysis measures: a technical report.

BACKGROUND Stroke survivors do not have routine access to objective feedback on their movement performance. OBJECTIVE To devise visual representation of objective measures of movement performance that are understandable by and meaningful to stroke survivors. DESIGN Co-production through interviews and generative discussion. PARTICIPANTS Eight people, mean age 65 years, who were at least one year after stroke with low, medium or high functional ability. All provided informed consent. DATA COLLECTION Participants performed standardised upper and lower limb functional tasks. Their movement was measured using the Vicon motion analysis system and surface electromyography. Participants returned six months later when they were shown anonymised visual representations of the movement tasks. Nobody saw their own data. Visual representations were provided of people with low, medium and high functional ability. A generative discussion elicited participants' views on how the measures should be presented visually to maximise understandability and meaningfulness. FINDINGS Participants' understanding of the visual presentation of movement analysis was enhanced with the addition of everyday symbols such as a stick-figure and a brief explanation from a physiotherapist/researcher. Meaningfulness was seen in terms of motivation to participate in and ownership of their rehabilitation. IMPLICATIONS These findings justify further development of objective measures of movement performance for use in routine clinical practice.

[1]  S. Sharifi,et al.  Service users’ views of the assessment process in stroke rehabilitation , 2014, Clinical rehabilitation.

[2]  Valerie M. Pomeroy,et al.  Kinematic Components of the Reach-to-Target Movement After Stroke for Focused Rehabilitation Interventions: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis , 2018, Front. Neurol..

[3]  John W Krakauer,et al.  Agreed definitions and a shared vision for new standards in stroke recovery research: The Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Roundtable taskforce , 2017, International journal of stroke : official journal of the International Stroke Society.

[4]  Amity Campbell,et al.  Measurement of Upper Limb Range of Motion Using Wearable Sensors: A Systematic Review , 2018, Sports Medicine - Open.

[5]  Sandeep K Subramanian,et al.  Validity of Movement Pattern Kinematics as Measures of Arm Motor Impairment Poststroke , 2010, Stroke.

[6]  Ifeoma Nwogu,et al.  Reported use of technology in stroke rehabilitation by physical and occupational therapists , 2018, Disability and rehabilitation. Assistive technology.

[7]  C. Wolfe,et al.  Qualitative analysis of stroke patients' motivation for rehabilitation , 2000, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[8]  Julie Luker,et al.  Stroke Survivors' Experiences of Physical Rehabilitation: A Systematic Review of Qualitative Studies. , 2015, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[9]  J. Kleim,et al.  Principles of experience-dependent neural plasticity: implications for rehabilitation after brain damage. , 2008, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[10]  Valerie M. Pomeroy,et al.  Getting a kinematic handle on reach-to-grasp: a meta-analysis. , 2017, Physiotherapy.

[11]  Charlotte Häger,et al.  Movement analysis of sit-to-stand – research informing clinical practice , 2015 .

[12]  A. Pollock,et al.  Top ten research priorities relating to life after stroke , 2012, The Lancet Neurology.

[13]  P. Dall,et al.  Measuring movement fluency during the sit-to-walk task. , 2013, Gait & posture.

[14]  C. Häger,et al.  Kinematic analysis of the upper extremity after stroke – how far have we reached and what have we grasped? , 2015 .

[15]  Sandra G Brauer,et al.  Factors Affecting the Ability of the Stroke Survivor to Drive Their Own Recovery outside of Therapy during Inpatient Stroke Rehabilitation , 2014, Stroke research and treatment.