Skip to main content

Rehabilitation in Subacute and Chronic Stage After Stroke

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Stroke Revisited: Diagnosis and Treatment of Ischemic Stroke

Part of the book series: Stroke Revisited ((STROREV))

Abstract

Despite advancing rehabilitation programs, stroke is the most prevalent disease to cause disablement. With the increase of the elderly population, the number of stroke patients increases as well. Although stroke patients at an early stage depend on a stroke unit in the acute hospital, their functional recovery and long-term health status are more affected by subacute rehabilitation hospital. Moreover, a stroke patient’s initial evaluation is crucial for prognosis and establishment of rehabilitation training strategies. The earlier stroke patients start their rehabilitation treatment, the better results they can attain; the recovery from stroke occurs within 3 months after the onset of stroke. Similarly, while neurological and functional recovery occurs in the acute and subacute stages, sometimes, it occurs 6 months after the onset of stroke or in the chronic stage. There are two main mechanisms of neurological recovery. The first is activity-dependent neuroplasticity in the injured cortical representation area, and second is vicariation, which is an operating mechanism as a substitute for the injured brain function in the remnant cortical area, outside of the damaged brain area. This stroke recovery is affected by many factors that influence reorganization of the damaged brain and early rehabilitation; furthermore, intensive rehabilitation and organized enriched environments also significantly affect recovery. In addition, there are substantial researches about new rehabilitation treatment, likely rTMS, tDCT, robotic therapies, mirror therapy, virtual reality, and drug augmentation; therefore, the results of these studies are expected to highlight promising rehabilitation treatments for stroke in the future.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Langhorne P, Bernhardt J, Kwakkel G. Stroke rehabilitation. Lancet. 2011;377:1693–702.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Tsuji T. Considerations for establishing community liaison for stroke: from a rehabilitation perspective. JMAJ. 2010;53:311–8.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Jørgensen HS, Nakayama H, Raaschou HO, et al. Outcome and time course of recovery in stroke. Part II: time course of recovery. The Copenhagen stroke study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1995;76:406–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Jette AM. Toward a common language for function, disability, and health. Phys Ther. 2006;86:726–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Geyh S, Cieza A, Schouten J, et al. ICF core sets for stroke. J Rehabil Med. 2004;44(Suppl):135–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Chan DK, Cordato D, O’Rourke F, et al. Comprehensive stroke units: a review of comparative evidence and experience. Int J Stroke. 2013;8:260–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Wieloch T, Nikolich K. Mechanisms of neural plasticity following brain injury. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2006;16:258–64.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Nudo RJ. Adaptive plasticity in motor cortex: implications for rehabilitation after brain injury. J Rehabil Med. 2003;41(Suppl):7–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Cotman CW, Berchtold NC. Exercise: a behavioral intervention to enhance brain health and plasticity. Trends Neurosci. 2002;25:295–301.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Tyson SF, Sadeghi-Demneh E, Nester CJ. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of an ankle-foot orthosis on gait biomechanics after stroke. Clin Rehabil. 2013;27:879–91.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Knutson JS, Fu MJ, Sheffler LR, et al. Neuromuscular electrical stimulation for motor restoration in hemiplegia. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am. 2015;26:729–45.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. AVERT Trial Collaboration group, Bernhardt J, Langhorne P, et al. Efficacy and safety of very early mobilisation within 24 h of stroke onset (AVERT): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2015;386:46–55.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Biernaskie J, Chernenko G, Corbett D. Efficacy of rehabilitative experience declines with time after focal ischemic brain injury. J Neurosci 2004;24:1245–54.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Lindsay P, Bayley M, Hellings C, et al. Canadian best practice recommendations for stroke care (updated 2008). CMAJ. 2008;179:S1.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Kang N, Summers JJ, Cauraugh JH. Transcranial direct current stimulation facilitates motor learning post-stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2016;87:345–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Fregni F, Pascual-Leone A. Technology insight: noninvasive brain stimulation in neurology-perspectives on the therapeutic potential of rTMS and tDCS. Nat Clin Pract Neurol. 2007;3:383–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Kwon SY, Hong SE, Kim EJ, et al. Monitoring of functioning status in subjects with chronic stroke in south Korea using WHODAS II. Ann Rehabil Med. 2016;40:111–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Hummel FC, Cohen LG. Non-invasive brain stimulation: a new strategy to improve neurorehabilitation after stroke? Lancet Neurol. 2006;5:708–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Yavuzer G, Selles R, Sezer N, et al. Mirror therapy improves hand function in subacute stroke: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2008;89:393–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Fu MJ, Knutson JS, Chae J. Stroke rehabilitation using virtual environments. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am. 2015;26:747–57.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Berthier ML, Green C, Lara JP, et al. Memantine and constraint-induced aphasia therapy in chronic post stroke aphasia. Ann Neurol. 2009;65:577–85.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Chollet F, Tardy J, Albucher JF, et al. Fluoxetine for motor recovery after acute ischemic stroke (FLAME): a randomized placebo-controlled trial. Lancet Neurol. 2011;10:123–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Han-Young Jung .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer Science+Business Media Singapore

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Jung, HY. (2017). Rehabilitation in Subacute and Chronic Stage After Stroke. In: Lee, SH. (eds) Stroke Revisited: Diagnosis and Treatment of Ischemic Stroke. Stroke Revisited. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-1424-6_33

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-1424-6_33

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-10-1423-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-10-1424-6

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics