Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24505098›Full record

ArticlePhysical therapy2014

Therapists' use of the Graded Repetitive Arm Supplementary Program (GRASP) intervention: a practice implementation survey study.

Louise A Connell, Naoimh E McMahon, Caroline L Watkins, Janice J Eng

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Physical therapy, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT06397170 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Effects of Graded Repetitive Arm Supplementary Program Versus Task Based Training on Upper Limb Function in Stroke Patients

TypeinterventionalSponsorRiphah International UniversityRan2024 to 2024Enrolled38ConditionsStroke, Upper Extremity Paresis, Motor ActivityArmsGraded repetitive arm supplementary program, Task based training
NCT07146789 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Effectiveness of the Home-Based Graded Repetitive Arm Supplementary Program Combined With Occupational Therapy Versus Conventional Occupational Therapy Alone on Quality of Life and Upper Limb Function After Stroke: A Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversidad Miguel Hernandez de ElcheRan2025 to 2027Enrolled70ConditionsStroke With HemiparesisArmsoccupational therapy combined with HomeGRASP program, occupational therapy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Implementing and evaluating a project to enable and encourage Caribbean data-sharing.Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Evidence-Based Practice Implementation in Stroke Rehabilitation: A Scoping Review of Barriers and Facilitators.The American journal of occupational therapy : official publication of the American Occupational Therapy Association
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Louise A ConnellL.A. Connell, PhD, BSc(Hons)Physiotherapy, Clinical Practice Research Unit, School of Health, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, United Kingdom PR1 2HE.
Naoimh E McMahon
Caroline L Watkins
Janice J Eng

Funding

Department of Health CDF-2012-05-201
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOnly a small percentage of research is ever successfully translated into practice. The Graded Repetitive Arm Supplementary Program (GRASP) is a stroke rehabilitation intervention that anecdotally has had rapid translation from research to clinical practice. This study was conducted to explore the characteristics of this practice implementation.

objectivesThe aims of this study were: (1) to explore the extent of practice implementation of GRASP in the United Kingdom; (2) using an implementation framework, to explore UK therapists' opinions of implementing GRASP; and (3) if GRASP is found to be used in the United Kingdom, to investigate differences in opinions between therapists who are using GRASP in practice and those who are not.

designA cross-sectional study design was used.

methodsData were collected via an online questionnaire. Participants in this study were members of the College of Occupational Therapy Specialist Section Neurological Practice and the Association of Chartered Physiotherapists Interested in Neurology.

resultsOf the 274 therapists who responded to the survey, 61 (22.3%) had experience of using GRASP, 114 (41.6%) knew of GRASP but had never used it, and 99 (36.1%) had never heard of GRASP. Therapists displayed positive opinions toward the implementation of a manual with graded progressions of structured upper limb exercises for people after stroke. Opinions were different between therapists who had used GRASP and those who had not. LIMITATIONS: The findings of this study may be limited by response bias.

conclusionsGRASP is a relatively new stroke rehabilitation intervention that has made impressive translation into the knowledge and practice of UK therapists. Therapists' opinions would suggest that GRASP is both an acceptable and feasible intervention and has the potential to be implemented by a greater number of therapists in a range of settings.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelExercise TherapyHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeStroke RehabilitationCross-Sectional StudiesHumansOccupational TherapyPhysical Therapy SpecialtyTranslational Research, BiomedicalUnited KingdomUpper Extremity

Identifiers

PMID24505098
PMCPMC4016677

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.