Article

PURPOSE: To describe how physical activity is monitored following stroke; to
summarise methods and devices used across the stroke pathway and document their
psychometric properties. METHODS: Searches of five databases identified studies
that included stroke survivors whose physical activity was quantitatively
measured. Two reviewers independently determined inclusion. A descriptive
synthesis was undertaken and reliability data for specific methods of monitoring
physical activity were pooled where possible. RESULTS: Ninety-one papers (60
using devices and 31 using observational methods) met inclusion criteria, with
3479 participants aged 21-96 years. Twenty-nine devices (72% accelerometers) were
identified. Devices were typically used to measure ambulant participants more
than 6 months following stroke. Direct observation of physical activity was
commonly used for inpatients.
No outcome measurements were common to all
methods/devices. Test-retest reliability was not reported for 23 devices; for the
remaining six it ranged from
r = 0.44 to r = 0.99. Inter-rater reliability of
observational methods ranged from 0.51 to 1.0. Validity was infrequently
reported. CONCLUSIONS: Physical activity outcomes were variable. Devices allow
for unobtrusive, sustained monitoring in free-living environments. Observational
methods suit inpatient settings but are time and labour intensive. No single
approach appears superior but standardisation of outcomes would improve the
field. IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATION: Physical activity measurement is highly
variable following stroke and better definition of physical activity outcomes
would enhance the field. Accelerometry and behavioural mapping are most commonly
used to measure physical activity following stroke, each have advantages and
disadvantages depending on the setting and the outcome of interest. There is no
single device ideal for clinical application for people following stroke.

Langue : ANGLAIS