Table 2.
Studies | Selection | Comparability | Outcome | Quality Score † | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Representativeness of the exposed cohort | Selection of the non-exposed cohort | Ascertainment of exposure | Outcome of Interest Was Not Present at Start of Study |
Comparability of cohorts based on the design or analysis | Assessment of outcome | Follow-Up Long Enough for Outcome to Occur (Median Duration of Follow-Up ≥ 6 Months) | Adequacy of follow up of cohorts | ||
Langhorne et al. (2000) [14] | Three major hospitals in the West of Scotland were participated. Two hospitals provided acute stroke patient care and one hospital provide acute stroke rehabilitation care after one-week discharge. ★ | No non-exposed cohort | Weekly assessments in hospitals by 3 research nurses ★ | Yes ★ | Complication subdivided by their baseline level of dependency and compared using Chi-square test. ★ | Questionnaire based structured interview ★ | Yes ★ | 100% participated at the 6-month follow-up, 99% at the 18-month follow-up, and 93% at the 30-month. ★ | Good |
Gamble et al. (2000) [29] | Consecutive cohort of stroke patients admitted to a single hospital. | Yes ★ | Patients underwent interview about shoulder pain ★ | Yes ★ | Age, sex, level of anxiety, disability score, or moderate to severe motor weakness were adjusted in chi-square test. ★ | Questionnaire based structured interview ★ | No | Not reported | Poor |
Gamble et al. (2002) [16] | Consecutive cohort of stroke patients admitted to a single hospital. | Yes ★ | Patients underwent interview about shoulder pain ★ | Yes ★ | Age, sex, depression and anxiety scores, and functional scores were adjusted in chi-square test. ★ | Questionnaire based structured interview ★ | Yes ★ | 97% participated at the 6-month follow-up. ★ | Good |
Aras et al. (2004) [9] | Consecutive cohort of stroke patients admitted to a single hospital. |
Yes ★ | Patients underwent interview about shoulder pain ★ |
No | The presence of spasticity, thalamic pain, neglect, and comorbidities were compared between groups with and without shoulder pain. ★ | Questionnaire based structured interview ★ | No | No statement | Poor |
Lindgren et al. (2007) [6] | Participants were representative of the Lund Stroke Register which covers the population of Lund-Orup, including 8 municipalities representing the local geographical area of Lund University Hospital. ★ | Yes ★ | Patients underwent interview about shoulder pain ★ | Yes ★ | Univariate analyses were used to compare arm motor function, disability, self-perceived health, subluxation, and sensory disturbance, between patients with and without shoulder pain. ★ | Questionnaire based structured interview ★ | Yes ★ | 79% participated at the 4-month follow-up, and 73% at the 12-month follow-up. ★ | Good |
Sackley et al. (2008) [30] | Potential participants were representative of the Nottingham Stroke Register, which includes all stroke admissions to Nottingham City Hospital and Queens Medical Centre, Nottingham, UK. ★ | No non-exposed cohort | Patients underwent interview about shoulder pain ★ | Yes ★ | confounders were not reported. | Questionnaire based structured interview ★ | Yes ★ | 84% participated at the 3-month follow-up, 61% at the 6-month follow-up, and 50% at the 12-month follow-up. ★ | Poor |
Kuptniratsaikul et al. (2009) [31] | Participants were representative of Thai Stroke Rehabilitation Registry, which maintain the record of patients with stroke who underwent rehabilitation in Thailand. ★ |
Yes ★ | Patients underwent interview about shoulder pain ★ | No | Confounders were compared using the multivariate analysis. ★ | Questionnaire based structured interview ★ | No | No statement | Poor |
Blennerhassett et al. (2010) [11] | The 94 retrospective histories of patients admitted for inpatient rehabilitation were audited which represented 63% of stroke patients in a 3-year period. | Yes ★ | Medical report | No | Confounders were compared using the logistic regression analysis. ★ | Retrospective data | No | No statement | Poor |
Klit et al. (2011) [32] | Participants were representative of National Indicator Project database which records all hospitalized acute stroke patients in Denmark. ★ | Yes ★ | Patients reported shoulder pain | Yes ★ | Confounders were compared using the multiple logistic regression analysis. ★ | Questionnaire-based survey | No | No statement | Poor |
Hansen et al. (2012) [33] | Consecutive cohort of stroke patients admitted to a single hospital. | No | Patients underwent a structured interview. ★ | No | Age and gender were adjusted in chi-square test. ★ | Questionnaire based structured interview ★ | Yes ★ | 97% participated at the 3-month follow-up, and 92% at the 6-month follow-up. ★ | Poor |
Lindgren et al. (2012) [34] | Participants were representative of the Lund Stroke Register which covers the population of Lund-Orup, including 8 municipalities representing the local geographical area of Lund University Hospital. ★ | Yes ★ | Patients underwent interview about shoulder pain ★ | Yes ★ | Univariate analyses were used to compare age, pain frequency, affected side, motor function, and passive range of abduction between patients with and without shoulder pain. ★ | Questionnaire based structured interview ★ | Yes ★ | 79% participated at the 4-month follow-up, and 73% at the 12-month follow-up. ★ | Good |
Kuptniratsaikul et al. (2013) [35] | Participants were representative of Thai Stroke Rehabilitation Registry, which maintain the record of patients with stroke who underwent rehabilitation in Thailand. ★ | Yes ★ | Patients underwent interview about shoulder pain ★ | No | Confounders were compared using the multivariate analysis. ★ | Questionnaire based structured interview ★ | Yes ★ | 65% participated at the 12-month follow-up. ★ | Good |
Chen et al. (2014) [36] | The medical records of patients consecutively admitted to a single hospital. | No | Retrospective data | No | Confounders were compared using the Chi-square test. ★ | Retrospective medical record data | No | No statement | Poor |
Kim et al. (2014) [37] | Consecutive cohort of stroke patients admitted to a single hospital. | Yes ★ | Patients underwent interview about shoulder pain ★ |
Yes ★ | Age, gender and significant variables from the univariate analysis were included in the final multivariate logistic regression model. ★ | Questionnaire based structured interview ★ | Yes ★ | 78% participated at the 3-month follow-up, and 62% at the 6-month follow-up. ★ | Good |
Kwon et al. (2014) [38] | Participants were representative of eight rehabilitation units situated in three different large local catchment area in the Republic of Korea. ★ | Yes ★ | Patients underwent interview about shoulder pain ★ | No | Age, sex, the Motricity Index of the upper and lower limbs, and ambulatory types were included in the multivariate logistic regression model. ★ | Questionnaire based structured interview ★ | No | No statement | Poor |
Karaahmet et al. (2014) [39] | Consecutive cohort of stroke patients admitted to a single physical medicine and rehabilitation clinic. | Yes ★ | Patients underwent interview about shoulder pain ★ | No | Disease duration, neglect, sensory disturbance, spasticity, immobilization, late rehabilitation, and motor function were included in backward stepwise multinomial logistic regression analysis. ★ |
Questionnaire based structured interview ★ | Yes ★ | No statement | Fair |
Adey-Wakeling et al. (2015) [3] | A population-based stroke incidence study conducted in a specific region of the western suburbs of Adelaide, South Australia. ★ | Yes ★ | Patients underwent interview about shoulder pain ★ | No | logistic regression models were used to analyses different confounders. ★ | Questionnaire based structured interview ★ | Yes ★ | 78% participated at the 4-month follow-up, and 75% at the 12-month follow-up. ★ | Good |
Paolucci et al. (2016) [40] | Consecutive cohort of stroke patients admitted to at eight Italian hospitals. ★ |
No | Patients underwent interview about shoulder pain ★ |
No | Age, gender, type of stroke, and severity of stroke were included in regression analysis. ★ | Questionnaire based structured interview ★ | No | No statement | Poor |
† Good quality: 3 or 4 stars (★) in selection domain AND 1 or 2 stars in comparability domain AND 2 or 3 stars in outcome domain; Fair quality: 2 stars in selection domain AND 1 or 2 stars in comparability domain AND 2 or 3 stars in outcome/exposure domain; Poor quality: 0 or 1 star in selection domain OR 0 stars in comparability domain OR 0 or 1 stars in outcome/exposure domain.