Implementation and Evaluation of the Graded Repetitive Arm Supplementary Program (GRASP) for People With Stroke in a Real World Community Setting: Case Report
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
OBJECTIVE: Exercise programs to improve upper extremity function following stroke in the community setting are needed as the length of hospital stay continues to decrease. However, little has been done to increase understanding of how to translate an evidence-based rehabilitation intervention to real-world programs. The purpose of this case report was to describe a process evaluation of the implementation of an evidence-based upper extremity rehabilitation intervention for stroke, the Graded Repetitive Arm Supplementary Program, in a community setting. METHODS (CASE DESCRIPTION): A partnership between a nonprofit support organization and a local community center was established to deliver the program in the community. The Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework with mixed methods was used to evaluate the implementation. RESULTS: Reach: Twenty people were screened, 14 people met eligibility requirements, and 13 consented to participate. The program reached approximately 1.25% of the potential target population. Effectiveness: Participants with stroke demonstrated significant improvement in upper extremity function and quality of life as measured by the Fugl-Meyer Assessment for upper extremity, Action Research Arm Test, Rating of Everyday Arm-use in the Community and Home Scale, and Stroke Impact Scale. Adoption: Factors that facilitated program uptake were the well-planned implementation and the workplace coaching based on the audit results. Factors contributing to ongoing participation were the social support within the group environment and the instructor's capability of engaging the group. Implementation: A partnership between a nonprofit organization and a local community center was successfully established. The program was implemented as intended as verified by a fidelity checklist. Participant adherence was high as confirmed by the average attendance and practice time. Maintenance: Both the partner organization and community center continued to offer the program. CONCLUSION: The Graded Repetitive Arm Supplementary Program had good fidelity of the critical principles and core components and was effective in improving upper extremity function and quality of life. IMPACT: This partnership model may serve as the first step for future larger-scale implementation and could be used to move other stroke rehabilitation interventions into community settings.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».