Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 575

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Randomized Clinical Trial of Therapeutic Exercise in Subacute Stroke

Duncan, Pamela, Studenski, Stephanie, Richards, Lorie, Gollub, Steven, Lai, Sue Min, Reker, Dean, Perera, Subashan, Yates, Joni, Koch, Victoria, Rigler, Sally, Johnson, Dallas·2003·Stroke

Abstract

Background and Purpose—Rehabilitation care after stroke is highly variable and increasingly shorter in duration. The effect of therapeutic exercise on impairments and functional limitations after stroke is not clear. The objective of this study was to determine whether a structured, progressive, physiologically based exercise program for subacute stroke produces gains greater than those attributable to spontaneous recovery and usual care. Methods—This randomized, controlled, single-blind clinical trial was conducted in a metropolitan area and 17 participating healthcare institutions. We included persons with stroke who were living in the community. One hundred patients (mean age, 70 years; mean Orpington score, 3.4) consented and were randomized from a screened sample of 582. Ninety-two subjects completed the trial. Intervention was a structured, progressive, physiologically based, therapist-supervised, in-home program of thirty-six 90-minute sessions over 12 weeks targeting flexibility, strength, balance, endurance, and upper-extremity function. Main outcome measures were postintervention strength (ankle and knee isometric peak torque, grip strength), upper- and lower-extremity motor control (Fugl Meyer), balance (Berg and functional reach), endurance (peak aerobic capacity and exercise duration), upper-extremity function (Wolf Motor Function Test), and mobility (timed 10-m walk and 6-minute walk distance). Results—In the intention-to-treat multivariate analysis of variance testing the overall effect, the intervention produced greater gains than usual care (Wilk’s λ=0.64,P=0.0056). Both intervention and usual care groups improved in strength, balance, upper- and lower-extremity motor control, upper-extremity function, and gait velocity. Gains for the intervention group exceeded those in the usual care group in balance, endurance, peak aerobic capacity, and mobility. Upper-extremity gains exceeded those in the usual care group only in patients with higher baseline function. Conclusions—This structured, progressive program of therapeutic exercise in persons who had completed acute rehabilitation services produced gains in endurance, balance, and mobility beyond those attributable to spontaneous recovery and usual care.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/01.str.0000083699.95351.f2

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 575

Metadata

Authors
Duncan, P., Studenski, S., Richards, L., Gollub, S., Lai, S. M., Reker, D., Perera, S., Yates, J., Koch, V., Rigler, S., & Johnson, D.
Venue
Stroke
Published
2003-09
Volume
34
Issue
9
Pages
2173-2180
ISSN
  • 0039-2499 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4628
OpenAlex
W2155194814
Cited by
575
References
0
FWCI
21.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Randomized Clinical Trial of Therapeutic Exercise in Subacute Stroke. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/01.str.0000083699.95351.f2
The paper
Duncan, P., Studenski, S., Richards, L., Gollub, S., Lai, S. M., Reker, D., Perera, S., Yates, J., Koch, V., Rigler, S., & Johnson, D. (2003). Randomized Clinical Trial of Therapeutic Exercise in Subacute Stroke. Stroke. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.str.0000083699.95351.f2

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.