Acceptance of disability in stroke: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Evidence for the association between acceptance of disability (AOD) and positive rehabilitation outcomes, as well as for the use of AOD measurements in stroke rehabilitation practice, has increased in the international literature in the last decade. However, measurement tools for AOD are heterogenous and there has not been a systematic review summarizing the current evidence on the use of AOD measures and factors associated with AOD. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to summarize current evidence on measurement tools used, present existing AOD scores in people with stroke and identify risk factors for and protective factors against poor AOD in people with stroke. METHODS: The original design and protocol of this systematic review were registered with PROSPERO. The included studies were published from 2008 to 2020 and identified from 5 databases-PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL Plus, PsycInfo, and the Cochrane Library-using the following inclusion criteria: participants diagnosed with stroke and aged ≥16 years, measurement of AOD, and published in English in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. Review articles were excluded. RESULTS: Five measurement tools for AOD were reported. The Revised Acceptance of Disability Scale (ADS-R) and the acceptance subscale of the Illness Cognition Questionnaire (ICQ) had the highest internal consistency. Scores ranged from 71.7 to 74.2 on the ADS-R, 16.9-18.3 on the ICQ, 16.5-26.9 on the Acceptance of Illness Scale, and 87.8-93.2 on the Attitudes towards Disabled Persons Form A. Poorer function and depressive symptoms were associated with poor AOD, whereas religious beliefs, support from others, and an understanding of stroke were associated with better AOD. CONCLUSIONS: The ADS-R and the acceptance subscale of the ICQ are currently the most reliable measurement tools for measuring AOD in people with stroke. Further research to validate the measurement tools is required. This may help to identify people who require additional support. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42017077063; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=77063.

The Evaluation of Prognostic Scores in Spontaneous Intracerebral Hemorrhage in an Asian Population: A Retrospective Study.

OBJECTIVE: Clinical grading scales used for prognostication in spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage facilitate informed-decision making for resource-intensive interventions. Numerous clinical prognostic scores are available for spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage. However, these have not been validated well in Asian patients, and the most appropriate scoring system remains debatable. We evaluated the utility of clinical scores in prognosticating 30-day mortality and 90-day functional outcome in patients with spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of all patients with spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage admitted to our tertiary center from December 2014 to May 2016. Data on clinical presentation, imaging, and outcomes were extracted from electronic medical records using a standardized form. The data were analyzed for predictors of outcomes. Performance of prognostic scales was compared using receiver-operator characteristic statistics. RESULTS: A total of 297 patients were included in the study. Mean age was 60.1 (SD 15.2) years and 190 (64.0%) were male. Thirty-two (10.8%) cases died within 30 days and 177 (62.8%) cases had poor functional outcome (modified Rankin scale of 3 or more) at 90 days. Dialysis dependency (OR=33.54, 95%CI=4.21-325.26, p=0.002), Glasgow coma scale (OR=0.76, 95%CI=0.64-0.88, p=0.001), hematoma volume (OR=1.02, 95%CI=1.00-1.04, p=0.027), and surgical evacuation (OR=0.15, 95%CI=0.02-0.66, p=0.024) were independent predictors for 30-day mortality. The original ICH score (0.862) and the ICH-Grading Scale (0.781) had the highest c-statistic for 30-day mortality and 90-day poor functional outcome respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Current prognostic scores performed acceptable-to-good in our patient cohort. Future studies may be useful to investigate the utility of these scores in clinical decision-making.