Endurance exercises versus treadmill training in improving muscle strength and functional activities in hemiparetic cerebral palsy

Which gait training intervention can most effectively improve gait ability in patients with cerebral palsy? A systematic review and network meta-analysis

Background

A vital objective to treat people with cerebral palsy (CP) is to increase gait velocity and improve gross motor function. This study aimed to evaluate the relative effectiveness of gait training interventions for persons with CP.

Methods

Studies published up to October 26, 2022 were searched from four electronic databases [including Medline (via PubMed), Web of Science, Embase and Cochrane]. Studies with randomized controlled trials (RCTs), people with CP, comparisons of different gait training interventions and outcomes of gait velocity and gross motor function measures (GMFM) were included in this study. The quality of the literature was evaluated using the risk of bias tool in the Cochrane Handbook, the extracted data were analyzed through network meta-analysis (NMA) using Stata16.0 and RevMan5.4 software.

Results

Twenty RCTs with a total of 516 individuals with CP were included in accordance with the criteria of this study. The results of the NMA analysis indicated that both external cues treadmill training (ECTT) [mean difference (MD) = 0.10, 95% confidence interval CI (0.04, 0.17), P < 0.05] and partial body weight supported treadmill training (BWSTT) [MD = 0.12, 95% CI (0.01, 0.23), P < 0.05] had better gait velocity than over ground gait training (OGT), BWSTT [MD = 0.09, 95%CI(0.01,0.18), P < 0.05] had a better gait velocity than robot-assisted gait training (RAGT), BWSTT [MD = 0.09, 95% CI (0.06, 0.13) P < 0.05] had a better gait velocity than treadmill training (TT), and BWSTT [MD = 0.14, 95% CI (0.07, 0.21), P < 0.05] had a better gait velocity than conventional physical therapy (CON). The SUCRA ranking indicated that BWSTT optimally improved the gait velocity, and the other followed an order of BWSTT (91.7%) > ECTT (80.9%) > RAGT (46.2%) > TT (44%) > OGT (21.6%) > CON (11.1%). In terms of GMFM, for dimension D (GMFM-D), there was no statistical difference between each comparison; for dimension E (GMFM-E), RAGT [MD = 10.45, 95% CI (2.51, 18.40), P < 0.05] was significantly more effective than CON. Both SUCRA ranking results showed that RAGT improved GMFM-D/E optimally, with rankings of RAGT (69.7%) > TT (69.3%) > BWSTT (67.7%) > OGT (24%) > CON (20.3%), and RAGT (86.1%) > BWSTT (68.2%) > TT (58%) > CON (20.1%) > OGT (17.6%) respectively.

Conclusion

This study suggested that BWSTT was optimal in increasing the gait velocity and RAGT was optimal in optimizing GMFM in persons with CP. Impacted by the limitations of the number and quality of studies, randomized controlled trials with larger sample sizes, multiple centers, and high quality should be conducted to validate the above conclusion. Further studies will be required to focus on the total duration of the intervention, duration and frequency of sessions, and intensity that are optimal for the promotion of gait ability in this population.

Systematic review registration

https://doi.org/10.37766/inplasy2022.10.0108, identifier: INPLASY2022100108.

Effect of muscle strength training in children and adolescents with spastic cerebral palsy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review and meta-analysis investigates the effects of strength training program in children and adolescents with cerebral palsy to improve function, activity, and participation.

DATA SOURCES

Five electronic databases (MEDLINE-Pubmed, Cochrane Library, PEDro, CINAHL, and SPORTDiscus) were systematically searched for full-text articles published from inception to 30 June 2021.

REVIEW METHODS

Randomized controlled trials were included, who compared: (i) child population with spastic cerebral palsy population between 0 and 22 years; (ii) studies in which a muscle strength training program was performed and included dosing information; (iii) studies comparing strength training with other physical therapy technique(s) or untreated control group. Studies with similar outcomes were pooled by calculating standardized mean differences. Risk of bias was assessed with Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing the risk of bias and PROSPERO's registration number ID: CRD42020193535.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven studies, comprising 847 participants with spastic cerebral palsy. The meta-analyses demonstrated significant standardized mean differences in favor of strength training program compared to other physical therapy technique(s) or untreated control group(s) for muscle strength at the knee flexors, at the knee extensor, at the plantarflexors, maximum resistance, balance, gait speed, GMFM (global, D and E dimension) and spasticity.

CONCLUSION

A strength training program has positive functional and activity effects on muscle strength, balance, gait speed, or gross motor function without increasing spasticity for children and adolescents with cerebral palsy in Gross Motor Function Classification System levels I, II, and III when adequate dosage and specific principles are utilized.

Mechanically assisted walking training for walking, participation, and quality of life in children with cerebral palsy

BACKGROUND

Cerebral palsy is the most common physical disability in childhood. Mechanically assisted walking training can be provided with or without body weight support to enable children with cerebral palsy to perform repetitive practice of complex gait cycles. It is important to examine the effects of mechanically assisted walking training to identify evidence-based treatments to improve walking performance.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of mechanically assisted walking training compared to control for walking, participation, and quality of life in children with cerebral palsy 3 to 18 years of age.

SEARCH METHODS

In January 2020, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, six other databases, and two trials registers. We handsearched conference abstracts and checked reference lists of included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs, including cross-over trials, comparing any type of mechanically assisted walking training (with or without body weight support) with no walking training or the same dose of overground walking training in children with cerebral palsy (classified as Gross Motor Function Classification System [GMFCS] Levels I to IV) 3 to 18 years of age.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

This review includes 17 studies with 451 participants (GMFCS Levels I to IV; mean age range 4 to 14 years) from outpatient settings. The duration of the intervention period (4 to 12 weeks) ranged widely, as did intensity of training in terms of both length (15 minutes to 40 minutes) and frequency (two to five times a week) of sessions. Six studies were funded by grants, three had no funding support, and eight did not report information on funding. Due to the nature of the intervention, all studies were at high risk of performance bias. Mechanically assisted walking training without body weight support versus no walking training Four studies (100 participants) assessed this comparison. Compared to no walking, mechanically assisted walking training without body weight support increased walking speed (mean difference [MD] 0.05 meter per second [m/s] [change scores], 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.03 to 0.07; 1 study, 10 participants; moderate-quality evidence) as measured by the Biodex Gait Trainer 2™ (Biodex, Shirley, NY, USA) and improved gross motor function (standardized MD [SMD] 1.30 [postintervention scores], 95% CI 0.49 to 2.11; 2 studies, 60 participants; low-quality evidence) postintervention. One study (30 participants) reported no adverse events (low-quality evidence). No study measured participation or quality of life. Mechanically assisted walking training without body weight support versus the same dose of overground walking training Two studies (55 participants) assessed this comparison. Compared to the same dose of overground walking, mechanically assisted walking training without body weight support increased walking speed (MD 0.25 m/s [change or postintervention scores], 95% CI 0.13 to 0.37; 2 studies, 55 participants; moderate-quality evidence) as assessed by the 6-minute walk test or Vicon gait analysis. It also improved gross motor function (MD 11.90% [change scores], 95% CI 2.98 to 20.82; 1 study, 35 participants; moderate-quality evidence) as assessed by the Gross Motor Function Measure (GMFM) and participation (MD 8.20 [change scores], 95% CI 5.69 to 10.71; 1 study, 35 participants; moderate-quality evidence) as assessed by the Pediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory (scored from 0 to 59), compared to the same dose of overground walking training. No study measured adverse events or quality of life. Mechanically assisted walking training with body weight support versus no walking training Eight studies (210 participants) assessed this comparison. Compared to no walking training, mechanically assisted walking training with body weight support increased walking speed (MD 0.07 m/s [change and postintervention scores], 95% CI 0.06 to 0.08; 7 studies, 161 participants; moderate-quality evidence) as assessed by the 10-meter or 8-meter walk test. There were no differences between groups in gross motor function (MD 1.09% [change and postintervention scores], 95% CI -0.57 to 2.75; 3 studies, 58 participants; low-quality evidence) as assessed by the GMFM; participation (SMD 0.33 [change scores], 95% CI -0.27 to 0.93; 2 studies, 44 participants; low-quality evidence); and quality of life (MD 9.50% [change scores], 95% CI -4.03 to 23.03; 1 study, 26 participants; low-quality evidence) as assessed by the Pediatric Quality of Life Cerebral Palsy Module (scored 0 [bad] to 100 [good]). Three studies (56 participants) reported no adverse events (low-quality evidence). Mechanically assisted walking training with body weight support versus the same dose of overground walking training Three studies (86 participants) assessed this comparison. There were no differences between groups in walking speed (MD -0.02 m/s [change and postintervention scores], 95% CI -0.08 to 0.04; 3 studies, 78 participants; low-quality evidence) as assessed by the 10-meter or 5-minute walk test; gross motor function (MD -0.73% [postintervention scores], 95% CI -14.38 to 12.92; 2 studies, 52 participants; low-quality evidence) as assessed by the GMFM; and participation (MD -4.74 [change scores], 95% CI -11.89 to 2.41; 1 study, 26 participants; moderate-quality evidence) as assessed by the School Function Assessment (scored from 19 to 76). No study measured adverse events or quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared with no walking, mechanically assisted walking training probably results in small increases in walking speed (with or without body weight support) and may improve gross motor function (with body weight support). Compared with the same dose of overground walking, mechanically assisted walking training with body weight support may result in little to no difference in walking speed and gross motor function, although two studies found that mechanically assisted walking training without body weight support is probably more effective than the same dose of overground walking training for walking speed and gross motor function. Not many studies reported adverse events, although those that did appeared to show no differences between groups. The results are largely not clinically significant, sample sizes are small, and risk of bias and intensity of intervention vary across studies, making it hard to draw robust conclusions. Mechanically assisted walking training is a means to undertake high-intensity, repetitive, task-specific training and may be useful for children with poor concentration.

The efficacy of functional gait training in children and young adults with cerebral palsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

The aim of this systematic review was to investigate the effects of functional gait training on walking ability in children and young adults with cerebral palsy (CP).

METHOD

The review was conducted using standardized methodology, searching four electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science) for relevant literature published between January 1980 and January 2017. Included studies involved training with a focus on actively practising the task of walking as an intervention while reporting outcome measures relating to walking ability.

RESULTS

Forty-one studies were identified, with 11 randomized controlled trials included. There is strong evidence that functional gait training results in clinically important benefits for children and young adults with CP, with a therapeutic goal of improved walking speed. Functional gait training was found to have a moderate positive effect on walking speed over standard physical therapy (effect size 0.79, p=0.04). Further, there is weaker yet relatively consistent evidence that functional gait training can also benefit walking endurance and gait-related gross motor function.

INTERPRETATION

There is promising evidence that functional gait training is a safe, feasible, and effective intervention to target improved walking ability in children and young adults with CP. The addition of virtual reality and biofeedback can increase patient engagement and magnify effects.

WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS

Functional gait training is a safe, feasible, and effective intervention to improve walking ability. Functional gait training shows larger positive effects on walking speed than standard physical therapy. Walking endurance and gait-related gross motor function can also benefit from functional gait training. Addition of virtual reality and biofeedback shows promise to increase engagement and improve outcomes.

Exercise interventions for cerebral palsy

BACKGROUND

Cerebral palsy (CP) is a neurodevelopmental disorder resulting from an injury to the developing brain. It is the most common form of childhood disability with prevalence rates of between 1.5 and 3.8 per 1000 births reported worldwide. The primary impairments associated with CP include reduced muscle strength and reduced cardiorespiratory fitness, resulting in difficulties performing activities such as dressing, walking and negotiating stairs.Exercise is defined as a planned, structured and repetitive activity that aims to improve fitness, and it is a commonly used intervention for people with CP. Aerobic and resistance training may improve activity (i.e. the ability to execute a task) and participation (i.e. involvement in a life situation) through their impact on the primary impairments of CP. However, to date, there has been no comprehensive review of exercise interventions for people with CP.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of exercise interventions in people with CP, primarily in terms of activity, participation and quality of life. Secondary outcomes assessed body functions and body structures. Comparators of interest were no treatment, usual care or an alternative type of exercise intervention.

SEARCH METHODS

In June 2016 we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, nine other databases and four trials registers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs of children, adolescents and adults with CP. We included studies of aerobic exercise, resistance training, and 'mixed training' (a combination of at least two of aerobic exercise, resistance training and anaerobic training).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened titles, abstracts and potentially relevant full-text reports for eligibility; extracted all relevant data and conducted 'Risk of bias' and GRADE assessments.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 29 trials (926 participants); 27 included children and adolescents up to the age of 19 years, three included adolescents and young adults (10 to 22 years), and one included adults over 20 years. Males constituted 53% of the sample. Five trials were conducted in the USA; four in Australia; two in Egypt, Korea, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan, the Netherlands, and the UK; three in Greece; and one apiece in India, Italy, Norway, and South Africa.Twenty-six trials included people with spastic CP only; three trials included children and adolescents with spastic and other types of CP. Twenty-one trials included people who were able to walk with or without assistive devices, four trials also included people who used wheeled mobility devices in most settings, and one trial included people who used wheeled mobility devices only. Three trials did not report the functional ability of participants. Only two trials reported participants' manual ability. Eight studies compared aerobic exercise to usual care, while 15 compared resistance training and 4 compared mixed training to usual care or no treatment. Two trials compared aerobic exercise to resistance training. We judged all trials to be at high risk of bias overall.We found low-quality evidence that aerobic exercise improves gross motor function in the short term (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.02 to 1.04, N = 65, 3 studies) and intermediate term (mean difference (MD) 12.96%, 95% CI 0.52% to 25.40%, N = 12, 1 study). Aerobic exercise does not improve gait speed in the short term (MD 0.09 m/s, 95% CI -0.11 m/s to 0.28 m/s, N = 82, 4 studies, very low-quality evidence) or intermediate term (MD -0.17 m/s, 95% CI -0.59 m/s to 0.24 m/s, N = 12, 1 study, low-quality evidence). No trial assessed participation or quality of life following aerobic exercise.We found low-quality evidence that resistance training does not improve gross motor function (SMD 0.12, 95% CI -0.19 to 0.43, N = 164, 7 studies), gait speed (MD 0.03 m/s, 95% CI -0.02 m/s to 0.07 m/s, N = 185, 8 studies), participation (SMD 0.34, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.70, N = 127, 2 studies) or parent-reported quality of life (MD 12.70, 95% CI -5.63 to 31.03, n = 12, 1 study) in the short term. There is also low-quality evidence that resistance training does not improve gait speed (MD -0.03 m/s, 95% CI -0.17 m/s to 0.11 m/s, N = 84, 3 studies), gross motor function (SMD 0.13, 95% CI -0.30 to 0.55, N = 85, 3 studies) or participation (MD 0.37, 95% CI -6.61 to 7.35, N = 36, 1 study) in the intermediate term.We found low-quality evidence that mixed training does not improve gross motor function (SMD 0.02, 95% CI -0.29 to 0.33, N = 163, 4 studies) or gait speed (MD 0.10 m/s, -0.07 m/s to 0.27 m/s, N = 58, 1 study) but does improve participation (MD 0.40, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.67, N = 65, 1 study) in the short-term.There is no difference between resistance training and aerobic exercise in terms of the effect on gross motor function in the short term (SMD 0.02, 95% CI -0.50 to 0.55, N = 56, 2 studies, low-quality evidence).Thirteen trials did not report adverse events, seven reported no adverse events, and nine reported non-serious adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The quality of evidence for all conclusions is low to very low. As included trials have small sample sizes, heterogeneity may be underestimated, resulting in considerable uncertainty relating to effect estimates. For children with CP, there is evidence that aerobic exercise may result in a small improvement in gross motor function, though it does not improve gait speed. There is evidence that resistance training does not improve gait speed, gross motor function, participation or quality of life among children with CP.Based on the evidence available, exercise appears to be safe for people with CP; only 55% of trials, however, reported adverse events or stated that they monitored adverse events. There is a need for large, high-quality, well-reported RCTs that assess the effectiveness of exercise in terms of activity and participation, before drawing any firm conclusions on the effectiveness of exercise for people with CP. Research is also required to determine if current exercise guidelines for the general population are effective and feasible for people with CP.

Effects of propranolol and exercise training in children with severe burns

OBJECTIVES

To investigate whether propranolol administration blocks the benefits induced by exercise training in severely burned children.

STUDY DESIGN

Children aged 7-18 years (n = 58) with burns covering ≥30% of the total body surface area were enrolled in this randomized trial during their acute hospital admission. Twenty-seven patients were randomized to receive propranolol, whereas 31 served as untreated controls. Both groups participated in 12 weeks of in-hospital resistance and aerobic exercise training. Muscle strength, lean body mass, and peak oxygen consumption (VO2 peak) were measured before and after exercise training. Paired and unpaired Student t tests were used for within and between group comparisons, and χ(2) tests for nominal data.

RESULTS

Age, length of hospitalization, and total body surface area burned were similar between groups. In both groups, muscle strength, lean body mass, and VO2 peak were significantly greater after exercise training than at baseline. The percent change in VO2 peak was significantly greater in the propranolol group than in the control group (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Exercise-induced enhancements in muscle mass, strength, and VO2 peak are not impaired by propranolol. Moreover, propranolol improves the aerobic response to exercise in massively burned children.