Comprehensive rehabilitation of older adults following acute stroke: emphasis on therapeutic exercises and the multidisciplinary approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background. Stroke remains one of the leading causes of long-term disability worldwide, especially among older adults. Given the increasing incidence of CerebroVascular Accidents (CVAs) in the aging population, there is a growing need for comprehensive, individualized rehabilitation programs that address the specific physical, cognitive, and emotional needs of elderly patients. Aim. To evaluate the effectiveness of therapeutic exercise as part of a multidisciplinary rehabilitation approach in elderly patients following an acute stroke. Materials and Methods. The study included 21 patients aged 62 to 79 years who were undergoing rehabilitation following an acute CVAs in a district hospital setting. The rehabilitation process featured a seven-stage individualized program consisting of physical therapy, occupational therapy, speech and language therapy, cognitive training, and psychosocial support. The effectiveness of the interventions was evaluated using standardized scales: the Modified Rankin Scale, Barthel Index, Montreal Cognitive Assessment, Visual Analogue Scale, and Borg Rating of Perceived Exertion. Results. 76% of the participants (n=16) showed significant improvement in their overall condition, including reduced neurological symptoms (aphasia, hemiplegia), enhanced motor skills, better balance, improved emotional well-being, and increased independence in daily activities. The remaining 24% of patients (n=5) also demonstrated positive changes but required additional rehabilitation cycles due to limited recovery potential and complex comorbidities. Conclusions. Individualized therapeutic exercises, integrated within a multidisciplinary rehabilitation framework, are effective in improving the physical and cognitive outcomes of elderly patients after stroke. Early initiation of rehabilitation, combined with continuous assessment and support from a multidisciplinary team, enhances functional recovery and improves the overall quality of life in this vulnerable population. Keywords: elderly patients, functional recovery, cerebrovascular accident.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".