Skip to main content
medRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search

Differences in outcomes following an intensive upper-limb rehabilitation programme for patients with common CNS-acting drug prescriptions

View ORCID ProfileAinslie Johnstone, Fran Brander, Kate Kelly, View ORCID ProfileSven Bestmann, Nick Ward
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.21.20215038
Ainslie Johnstone
1Department for Clinical and Movement Neuroscience, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Ainslie Johnstone
  • For correspondence: ainslie.johnstone@ucl.ac.uk
Fran Brander
2The National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, London, UK
3UCLP Centre for Neurorehabilitation, London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Kate Kelly
2The National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, London, UK
3UCLP Centre for Neurorehabilitation, London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Sven Bestmann
1Department for Clinical and Movement Neuroscience, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, UK
4Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Sven Bestmann
Nick Ward
1Department for Clinical and Movement Neuroscience, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, UK
2The National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, London, UK
3UCLP Centre for Neurorehabilitation, London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

Difficulty using the upper-limb is a major barrier to independence for many patients post-stroke or brain injury. High dose rehabilitation can result in clinically significant improvements in function even years after the incident, however there is still high variability in patient responsiveness to such interventions that cannot be explained by age, sex or time since stroke.

This retrospective study investigated whether patients prescribed certain classes of CNS-acting drugs - GABA agonists, antiepileptics and antidepressants-differed in their outcomes on the 3 week intensive Queen Square Upper-Limb (QSUL) programme.

For 277 stroke or brain injury patients (167 male, median age 52 years (IQR 21), median time since incident 20 months (IQR 26)) upper-limb impairment and activity was assessed at admission to the programme and at 6 months post-discharge, using the upper limb component of the Fugl-Meyer (FM), Action Research Arm Test (ARAT), and Chedoke Arm and Hand Activity Inventory (CAHAI). Drug prescriptions were obtained from primary care physicians at referral. Specification curve analysis (SCA) was used to protect against selective reporting results and add robustness to the conclusions of this retrospective study.

Patients with GABA agonist prescriptions had significantly worse upper-limb scores at admission but no evidence for a significant difference in programme-induced improvements was found. Additionally, no evidence of significant differences in patients with or without antiepileptic drug prescriptions on either admission to, or improvement on, the programme was found in this study. Whereas, though no evidence was found for differences in admission scores, patients with antidepressant prescriptions experienced reduced improvement in upper-limb function, even when accounting for anxiety and depression scores.

These results demonstrate that, when prescribed typically, there was no evidence that patients prescribed GABA agonists performed worse on this high-intensity rehabilitation programme. Patients prescribed antidepressants, however, performed poorer than expected on the QSUL rehabilitation programme. While the reasons for these differences are unclear, identifying these patients prior to admission may allow for better accommodation of differences in their rehabilitation needs.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Funding Statement

A Johnstone is funded by a project grant from the Dunhill Medical Trust. Thanks to all the physiotherapists and occupational therapists at The National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, Queen Square, who have treated patients on this programme. Thanks to UCLH Charities, Friends of UCLH and The National Brain Appeal for funding to purchase equipment used in this programme.

Author Declarations

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

This study was registered with University College London Hospitals (UCLH) National Health Service Trust clinical audit and service development department as a service evaluation. As the project did not involve any change to typical care the UCL/UCLH Joint Research Office and UCL Research Ethics Committee deemed it exempt from requiring ethical approval.

All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.

Yes

Footnotes

  • Twitter Handle: @AinslieJstone

  • Figures updated, some wording changes.

Data Availability

Data are available for credible researchers upon request to Dr Ward. Code available at https://github.com/ainsliej/SCA-QSUL_Drugs

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted February 08, 2021.
Download PDF
Data/Code
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Differences in outcomes following an intensive upper-limb rehabilitation programme for patients with common CNS-acting drug prescriptions
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Differences in outcomes following an intensive upper-limb rehabilitation programme for patients with common CNS-acting drug prescriptions
Ainslie Johnstone, Fran Brander, Kate Kelly, Sven Bestmann, Nick Ward
medRxiv 2020.10.21.20215038; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.21.20215038
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Differences in outcomes following an intensive upper-limb rehabilitation programme for patients with common CNS-acting drug prescriptions
Ainslie Johnstone, Fran Brander, Kate Kelly, Sven Bestmann, Nick Ward
medRxiv 2020.10.21.20215038; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.21.20215038

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Neurology
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Addiction Medicine (214)
  • Allergy and Immunology (495)
  • Anesthesia (106)
  • Cardiovascular Medicine (1091)
  • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (194)
  • Dermatology (141)
  • Emergency Medicine (274)
  • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (497)
  • Epidemiology (9747)
  • Forensic Medicine (5)
  • Gastroenterology (480)
  • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (2299)
  • Geriatric Medicine (221)
  • Health Economics (461)
  • Health Informatics (1548)
  • Health Policy (729)
  • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (600)
  • Hematology (236)
  • HIV/AIDS (500)
  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (11623)
  • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (615)
  • Medical Education (236)
  • Medical Ethics (67)
  • Nephrology (256)
  • Neurology (2137)
  • Nursing (133)
  • Nutrition (332)
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (424)
  • Occupational and Environmental Health (516)
  • Oncology (1171)
  • Ophthalmology (363)
  • Orthopedics (128)
  • Otolaryngology (220)
  • Pain Medicine (145)
  • Palliative Medicine (50)
  • Pathology (308)
  • Pediatrics (693)
  • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (298)
  • Primary Care Research (265)
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (2168)
  • Public and Global Health (4640)
  • Radiology and Imaging (775)
  • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (451)
  • Respiratory Medicine (622)
  • Rheumatology (273)
  • Sexual and Reproductive Health (224)
  • Sports Medicine (208)
  • Surgery (250)
  • Toxicology (42)
  • Transplantation (120)
  • Urology (94)