Cited by 64Stroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryPhysical Activity and HealthMedical Practices and Rehabilitation

Changes in physical activity and related functional and disability levels in the first six months after stroke: A longitudinal follow-up study

Open access
Askim, T, Bernhardt, J, Churilov, L, Fredriksen, K, Indredavik, B·2013·Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To investigate how physical activity changes over the first 6 months after stroke, and how activity is related to function. DESIGN: A longitudinal study with an initial assessment within 14 days after stroke (in hospital) and follow-up assessments 1, 3 and 6 months later (in-patient rehabilitation or at home). SUBJECTS: Patients with acute stroke. METHODS: An accelerometer with a switch tilt was used to measure activity over a period of 24 h on each occasion. The Barthel Index (BI) and Berg Balance Scale (BBS) were applied as functional measures. RESULTS: A total of 28 out of 44 recruited patients were included in the analysis (15 men (53.6%), mean age 79 years). The median time in the upright position increased from 92 min at baseline to 144 min 6 months later. A generalized least-square regression models showed that time in the upright position increased by 2.0 min for every day from baseline to 1 month later (p = 0.003). A single point increase on the BBS was associated with an extra 4.3 min in the upright position (p < 0.001), while a single point increase on the BI was associated with an extra 2.1 min in the upright position (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Activity levels are very low during the first 6 months after stroke. However, time in the upright position was found to increase as function improved.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2340/16501977-1137

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Self-check

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

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so the self-check wasn’t run.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Askim, T., Bernhardt, J., Churilov, L., Fredriksen, K., & Indredavik, B.
Affiliations
Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NO)
Venue
Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine
Published
2013
Volume
45
Issue
5
Pages
423-428
ISSN
1650-1977 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2106947772
Cited by
64
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 1
FWCI
4.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Physical Activity and Health
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Medical Practices and Rehabilitation
Keywords
stroke, physical activity, accelerometer-measured activity, balance, functional recovery, Barthel Index, Berg Balance Scale, disability, stroke rehabilitation, older adults
MeSH terms
Stroke Rehabilitation, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Persons with Disabilities, Disabled Persons, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Middle Aged, Motor Activity, Recovery of Function, Accelerometry

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