Objective: To estimate societal costs and changes in health-related quality of life in stroke patients, up to one year after start of medical specialist rehabilitation.& nbsp; Design:... Show moreObjective: To estimate societal costs and changes in health-related quality of life in stroke patients, up to one year after start of medical specialist rehabilitation.& nbsp; Design: Observational.& nbsp; Patients: Consecutive patients who received med ical specialist rehabilitation in the Stroke Cohort Out-comes of REhabilitation (SCORE) study.& nbsp; Methods: Participants completed questionnaires on health-related quality of life (EuroQol EQ-5D-3L), absenteeism, out-of-pocket costs and healthcare use at start and end of rehabilitation and 6 and 12 months after start. Clinical characteristics and reha-bilitation costs were extracted from the medical and financial records, respectively.& nbsp; Results: From 2014 to 2016 a total of 313 stroke patients completed the study. Mean age was 59 (standard deviation (SD) 12) years, 185 (59%) were male, and 244 (78%) inpatients. Mean costs for inpatient and outpatient rehabilitation were US$70,601 and US$27,473, respectively. For in-patients, utility (an expression of quality of life) in-creased significantly between baseline and 6 months (EQ-5D-3L 0.66 & ndash;0.73, p = 0.01; visual analogue scale 0.77 & ndash;0.82, p < 0.001) and between baseline and 12 months (visual analogue scale 0.77 & ndash;0.81, p < 0.001).& nbsp; Conclusion: One-year societal costs from after the start of rehabilitation in stroke patients were con-siderable. Future research should also include costs prior to rehabilitation. For inpatients, health-related quality of life, expressed in terms of utility, improved significantly over time. Show less
Objective: To compare the effect on disability and quality of life, of conventional rehabilitation (control group) with individualized, tailored eRehabilitation intervention alongside conventional... Show moreObjective: To compare the effect on disability and quality of life, of conventional rehabilitation (control group) with individualized, tailored eRehabilitation intervention alongside conventional rehabilitation (Fast@home; intervention group), for people with stroke.Methods: Pre-post design. The intervention comprised cognitive (Braingymmer (R)) and physical (Telere-validatie (R)/Physitrack (R)) exercises, activity-tracking (Activ8 (R)) and psycho-education. Assessments were made at admission (T0) and after 3 (T3) and 6 months (T6). The primary outcome concerned disability (Stroke Impact Scale; SIS). Secondary outcomes were: health-related qual-ity of life, fatigue, self-management, participation and physical activity. Changes in scores be-tween T0-T3, T3-T6, and T0-T6 were compared by analysis of variance and linear mixed models.Results: The study included 153 and 165 people with stroke in the control and intervention groups, respectively. In the intervention group, 82 (50%) people received the intervention, of whom 54 (66%) used it. Between T3 and T6, the change in scores for the SIS subscales Communication (control group/ intervention group -1.7/-0.3) and Physical strength (-5.7/3.3) were significantly greater in the total intervention group (all mean differences< minimally clinically important differences). No significant differences were found for other SIS subscales or secondary outcomes, or between T0-T3 and T0-T6.Conclusion: eRehabilitation alongside conventional stroke rehabilitation had a small positive effect on communication and physical strength on the longer term, compared to conventional rehabilitation only. Show less
