Objectives: Somatosensory loss is common after stroke with one-in-two individuals affected. Although clinical practice guidelines recommend providing somatosensory rehabilitation, this impairment often remains unassessed and untreated. To address the gap between guideline recommendations and clinical practice, this study sought to understand the factors influencing delivery of evidence-based upper limb sensory rehabilitation after stroke. Design: Qualitative study involving focus groups and interviews. Data analysis used an inductive approach (thematic analysis) and deductive analysis using implementation theory (the Theoretical Domains Framework and Normalisation Process Theory). Setting: Eight healthcare organisations in metropolitan and regional areas of Victoria and New South Wales, Australia. Participants: Eighty-seven rehabilitation therapists (79% occupational therapists and 21% physiotherapists) were purposively sampled and participated in a knowledge translation study with staggered recruitment from 2014 to 2018. Results: Three types of factors influenced therapists’ delivery of upper limb somatosensory rehabilitation: individual (‘The uncertain, unskilled therapist’), patient (‘Patient understanding and priorities ’ ) and organisational (‘System pressures and resources ’ ). Deductive analysis using implementation theory identified key determinants of practice change, such as opportunities to consolidate new skills, the anticipated benefits of upskilling as a therapy team and the work anticipated by therapists to incorporate a new somatosensory rehabilitation approach. Conclusions: Occupational therapists and physiotherapists hold valuable insights towards practice change in somatosensory rehabilitation from the ‘frontline’. Therapists experience barriers to change including a lack of knowledge and skills, lack of resources and organisational pressures. Facilitators for change were identified, including social support and therapists’ perceived legitimacy in using new somatosensory rehabilitation approaches. Results will inform the design of a tailored implementation strategy to increase the use of evidence-based somatosensory rehabilitation in Australia. Trial registration number: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12615000933550).

Altered somatosensory function is common among stroke survivors, yet is often poorly characterized. Methods of profiling somatosensation that illustrate the variability in impairment within and across different modalities remain limited. We aimed to characterize post-stroke somatosensation profiles (“fingerprints”) of the upper limb using an unsupervised machine learning cluster analysis to capture hidden relationships between measures of touch, proprioception, and haptic object recognition. Raw data were pooled from six studies where multiple quantitative measures of upper limb somatosensation were collected from stroke survivors (n = 207) using the Tactile Discrimination Test (TDT), Wrist Position Sense Test (WPST) and functional Tactile Object Recognition Test (fTORT) on the contralesional and ipsilesional upper limbs. The Growing Self Organizing Map (GSOM) unsupervised machine learning algorithm was used to generate a topology-preserving two-dimensional mapping of the pooled data and then separate it into clusters. Signature profiles of somatosensory impairment across two modalities (TDT and WPST; n = 203) and three modalities (TDT, WPST, and fTORT; n = 141) were characterized for both hands. Distinct impairment subgroups were identified. The influence of background and clinical variables was also modelled. The study provided evidence of the utility of unsupervised cluster analysis that can profile stroke survivor signatures of somatosensory impairment, which may inform improved diagnosis and characterization of impairment patterns.

To characterise the assessments and treatments that comprise “usual care” for stroke patients with somatosensory loss, and whether usual care has changed over time.Comparison of cross-sectional, ob...

Somatosensory loss post-stroke is common, with touch sensation characteristically impaired. Yet, quantitative, standardized measures of touch discrimination available for clinical use are currently limited. We aimed to characterize touch impairment and re-establish the criterion of abnormality of the Tactile Discrimination Test (TDT) using pooled data and to determine the sensitivity and specificity of briefer test versions. Baseline data from stroke survivors (n = 207) and older neurologically healthy controls (n = 100) assessed on the TDT was extracted. Scores were re-analyzed to determine an updated criterion of impairment and the ability of brief test versions to detect impairment. Updated scoring using an area score was used to calculate the TDT percent maximum area (PMA) score. Touch impairment was common for the contralesional hand (83%) but also present in the ipsilesional hand (42%). The criterion of abnormality was established as 73.1 PMA across older adults and genders. High sensitivity and specificity were found for briefer versions of the TDT (25 vs. 50 trials; 12 or 15 vs. 25 trials), with sensitivity ranging between 91.8 and 96.4% and specificity between 72.5 and 95.0%. Conclusion: Updated criterion of abnormality and the high sensitivity and specificity of brief test versions support the use of the TDT in clinical practice settings.

Comparison across somatosensory domains, important for clinical and scientific goals, requires prior calibration of impairment severity. Provided test score distributions are comparable across domains, valid comparisons of impairment can be made by reference to score locations in the corresponding distributions (percentile rank or standardized scores). However, this is often not the case. Test score distributions for tactile texture discrimination (n = 174), wrist joint proprioception (n = 112), and haptic object identification (n = 98) obtained from pooled samples of stroke survivors in rehabilitation settings were investigated. The distributions showed substantially different forms, undermining comparative calibration via percentile rank or standardized scores. An alternative approach is to establish comparable locations in the psychophysical score ranges spanning performance from just noticeably impaired to maximally impaired. Several simulation studies and a theoretical analysis were conducted to establish the score distributions expected from completely insensate responders for each domain. Estimates of extreme impairment values suggested by theory, simulation and observed samples were consistent. Using these estimates and previously discovered values for impairment thresholds in each test domain, comparable ranges of impairment from just noticeable to extreme impairment were found. These ranges enable the normalization of the three test scales for comparison in clinical and research settings.

Implementation of evidence-informed rehabilitation of the upper limb is variable, and outcomes for stroke survivors are often suboptimal. We established a national partnership of clinicians, survivors of stroke, researchers, healthcare organizations, and policy makers to facilitate change. The objectives of this study are to increase access to best-evidence rehabilitation of the upper limb and improve outcomes for stroke survivors. This prospective pragmatic, knowledge translation study involves four new specialist therapy centers to deliver best-evidence upper-limb sensory rehabilitation (known as SENSe therapy) for survivors of stroke in the community. A knowledge-transfer intervention will be used to upskill therapists and guide implementation. Specialist centers will deliver SENSe therapy, an effective and recommended therapy, to stroke survivors in the community. Outcomes include number of successful deliveries of SENSe therapy by credentialled therapists; improved somatosensory function for stroke survivors; improved performance in self-selected activities, arm use, and quality of life; treatment fidelity and confidence to deliver therapy; and for future implementation, expert therapist effect and cost-effectiveness. In summary, we will determine the effect of a national partnership to increase access to evidence-based upper-limb sensory rehabilitation following stroke. If effective, this knowledge-transfer intervention could be used to optimize the delivery of other complex, evidence-based rehabilitation interventions.