Additional early active repetitive motor training did not prevent contracture in adults receiving task-specific upper limb training after stroke: a randomised trial

Assistive technologies, including orthotic devices, for the management of contractures in adults after a stroke

BACKGROUND

Contractures (reduced range of motion and increased stiffness of a joint) are a frequent complication of stroke. Contractures can interfere with function and cause cosmetic and hygiene problems. Preventing and managing contractures might improve rehabilitation and recovery after stroke.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of assistive technologies for the management of contractures in adults after a stroke.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, five other databases, and three trials registers in May 2022. We also searched for reference lists of relevant studies, contacted experts in the field, and ran forward citation searches.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled studies (RCTs) that used electrical, mechanical, or electromechanical devices to manage contractures in adults with stroke were eligible for inclusion in this review. We planned to include studies that compared assistive technologies against no treatment, routine therapy, or another assistive technology.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors (working in pairs) selected all studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. The primary outcomes were passive joint range of motion (PROM) with and without standardised force, and indirect measures of PROM. The secondary outcomes included hygiene. We also wanted to evaluate the adverse effects of assistive technology. Effects were expressed as mean differences (MDs) or standardised mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

MAIN RESULTS

Seven studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Five of these were meta-analysed; they included 252 adults treated in acute and subacute rehabilitation settings. All studies compared assistive technology with routine therapy; one study also compared assistive technology with no treatment, but we were unable to obtain separate data for stroke participants. The assistive technologies used in the studies were electrical stimulation, splinting, positioning using a hinged board, and active repetitive motor training using a non-robotic device with electrical stimulation. Only one study applied stretching to end range. Treatment duration ranged from four to 12 weeks. The overall risk of bias was high for all studies. We are uncertain whether: • electrical stimulation to wrist extensors improves passive range of wrist extension (MD -7.30°, 95% CI -18.26° to 3.66°; 1 study, 81 participants; very low-certainty evidence); • a non-robotic device with electrical stimulation to shoulder flexors improves passive range of shoulder flexion (MD -9.00°, 95% CI -25.71° to 7.71°; 1 study; 50 participants; very low-certainty evidence); • assistive technology improves passive range of wrist extension with standardised force (SMD -0.05, 95% CI -0.39 to 0.29; four studies, 145 participants; very low-certainty evidence): • a non-robotic device with electrical stimulation to elbow extensors improves passive range of elbow extension (MD 0.41°, 95% CI -0.15° to 0.97°; 1 study, 50 participants; very low-certainty evidence). One study reported the adverse outcome of pain when using a hinged board to apply stretch to wrist and finger flexors, and another study reported skin breakdown when using a thumb splint. No studies reported hygiene or indirect measures of PROM.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Only seven small RCTs met the eligibility criteria of this review, and all provided very low-certainty evidence. Consequently, we cannot draw firm conclusions on the effects of assistive technology compared with routine therapy or no therapy. It was also difficult to confirm whether there is a risk of harm associated with treatment using assistive technology. Future studies should apply adequate treatment intensity (i.e. magnitude and the duration of stretch) and use valid and reliable outcome measures. Such studies might better identify the role of assistive technology in the management of contractures in adults after a stroke.

Dose, Content, and Context of Usual Care in Stroke Upper Limb Motor Interventions: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

The objectives of this systematic review were to describe the current dose and content of usual care upper limb motor intervention for inpatients following stroke and examine if context factors alter dose and content.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic search (EMBASE, MEDLINE) was completed from January 2015 to February 2023 (PROSPERO CRD42021281986).

METHODS

Studies were eligible if they reported non-protocolised usual care upper limb motor intervention dose data for stroke inpatients. Studies were rated using the Johanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tool. Data were descriptively reported for dose dimensions of time (on task or, in therapy) and intensity (repetitions, repetition/minute), content (intervention type/mode), and context (e.g., severity strata).

RESULTS

Eight studies were included from four countries, largely reflecting inpatient rehabilitation. Time in therapy ranged from 23 to 121 min/day. Time on task ranged from 8 to 44 min/day. Repetitions ranged from 36 to 57/session, and 15 to 282/day. Time on task was lowest in the stratum of people with severe upper limb impairment (8 min/day), the upper limit for this stratum was 41.5 min/day. There was minimal reporting of usual care content across all studies.

CONCLUSION

Upper limb motor intervention dose appears to be increasing in usual care compared to prior reports (e.g., average 21 min/day and 23 to 32 repetitions/session). Context variability suggests that doses are lowest in the stratum of patients with a severely impaired upper limb. Consistent reporting of the multiple dimensions of dose and content is necessary to better understand usual care offered during inpatient rehabilitation.

Personalised Online Upper-Limb Physiotherapy for Stroke Survivors during the Inpatient Phase: A Feasibility Study

BACKGROUND

After a stroke, inpatients often receive less than the recommended dose of therapy. Telerehabilitation may assist by providing personalised rehabilitation programmes without face-to-face therapy time. This study aimed to evaluate the acceptability and feasibility of an individualised programme of upper-limb rehabilitation that is delivered via an online rehabilitation platform for inpatient stroke survivors.

METHODS

Stroke survivors were recruited from three stroke units in one NHS Board in Scotland and randomised to the intervention (personalised upper-limb exercise programme delivered via an online physiotherapy platform for four weeks, up to 30 min five times per week, in addition to usual care) or the control group (usual care). The main outcomes are related to recruitment, attrition, adherence and safety. The clinical measures were the Action Research Arm Test, Trunk Impairment Scale and Modified Ashworth Scale. The intervention participants, their carers and physiotherapists completed questionnaires on the acceptability of the intervention.

RESULTS

Twenty-six participants, 42% males, were recruited around three weeks post-stroke, on average. There were 13 participants in each group, with a mean age of 69 years (SD of 12) and 67 years (SD of 11) for the control and intervention groups, respectively. Overall, 47% of those screened for eligibility were randomised, and attrition was 23% in the intervention group mainly due to discharge before the end of the intervention. Participants who adhered to their programme (completed more than two-thirds), generally those with an engaged carer, demonstrated a trend toward improved clinical outcomes. Overall, the patients, carers and physiotherapists were positive regarding the intervention. There was a total of five reported adverse events, none of which were related to the study.

CONCLUSION

An upper-limb unsupervised exercise intervention using an online physiotherapy platform for inpatient stroke survivors is feasible, safe and acceptable to patients, carers and physiotherapists. A fully powered RCT is warranted to investigate the clinical- and cost-effectiveness of such interventions for this patient group.

Effects of robotic upper limb treatment after stroke on cognitive patterns: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Robotic therapy (RT) has been internationally recognized for the motor rehabilitation of the upper limb. Although it seems that RT can stimulate and promote neuroplasticity, the effectiveness of robotics in restoring cognitive deficits has been considered only in a few recent studies.

OBJECTIVE

To verify whether, in the current state of the literature, cognitive measures are used as inclusion or exclusion criteria and/or outcomes measures in robotic upper limb rehabilitation in stroke patients.

METHODS

The systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. Studies eligible were identified through PubMed/MEDLINE and Web of Science from inception to March 2021.

RESULTS

Eighty-one studies were considered in this systematic review. Seventy-three studies have at least a cognitive inclusion or exclusion criteria, while only seven studies assessed cognitive outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Despite the high presence of cognitive instruments used for inclusion/exclusion criteria their heterogeneity did not allow the identification of a guideline for the evaluation of patients in different stroke stages. Therefore, although the heterogeneity and the low percentage of studies that included cognitive outcomes, seemed that the latter were positively influenced by RT in post-stroke rehabilitation. Future larger RCTs are needed to outline which cognitive scales are most suitable and their cut-off, as well as what cognitive outcome measures to use in the various stages of post-stroke rehabilitation.

Superior treatment efficacy of neuromodulation rehabilitation for upper limb recovery after stroke: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This study aims to explore the treatment efficacy of different motor rehabilitation interventions for upper limb impairment recovery.

RESEARCH DESIGN & METHODS

Publications were searched in PubMed and Embase. 4 grouped motor rehabilitation treatments (training, technological intervention, pharmacological intervention, and neuromodulation) were compared. The change of the Fugl-Meyer Assessment Scale for Upper Extremity (FMA-UE) was applied to assess upper limb function after stroke.

RESULTS

56 studies including 5292 patients were identified. A significant difference was found among the 4 groups (P = 0.02). Neuromodulation interventions had the best treatment efficacy among the 4 types of interventions (P < 0.01). Among neuromodulation interventions, acupuncture, electric, or magnetic intervention all had therapeutic efficacy for stroke upper limb recovery, without significant subgroup difference (P = 0.34). Stroke patients with mild upper limb impairment might not benefit from motor rehabilitation (P = 0.14).

CONCLUSION

Neuromodulation interventions might have the best therapeutic efficacy among motor rehabilitation treatments for upper limb impairment after stroke. It is a potential treatment direction for upper limb recovery among stroke patients. However, since a large proportion of the original studies are low to very low-quality evidence, large-scale RCTs should be conducted in the future to validate current findings and assess treatment effects based on patient characteristics.

Exercise for Neuropathic Pain: A Systematic Review and Expert Consensus

Background: Neuropathic pain (NP), a severe and disruptive symptom following many diseases, normally restricts patients' physical functions and leads to anxiety and depression. As an economical and effective therapy, exercise may be helpful in NP management. However, few guidelines and reviews focused on exercise therapy for NP associated with specific diseases. The study aimed to summarize the effectiveness and efficacy of exercise for various diseases with NP supported by evidence, describe expert recommendations for NP from different causes, and inform policymakers of the guidelines.

Design: A systematic review and expert consensus.

Methods: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed. We included systematic review and meta-analysis, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), which assessed patients with NP. Studies involved exercise intervention and outcome included pain intensity at least. Physiotherapy Evidence Database and the Assessment of Multiple Systematic reviews tool were used to grade the quality assessment of the included RCTs and systematic reviews, respectively. The final grades of recommendation were based on strength of evidence and a consensus discussion of results of Delphi rounds by the Delphi consensus panel including 21 experts from the Chinese Association of Rehabilitation Medicine.

Results: Eight systematic reviews and 21 RCTs fulfilled all of the inclusion criteria and were included, which were used to create the 10 evidence-based consensus statements. The 10 expert recommendations regarding exercise for NP symptoms were relevant to the following 10 different diseases: spinal cord injury, stroke, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson's disease, cervical radiculopathy, sciatica, diabetic neuropathy, chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy, HIV/AIDS, and surgery, respectively. The exercise recommended in the expert consensus involved but was not limited to muscle stretching, strengthening/resistance exercise, aerobic exercise, motor control/stabilization training and mind-body exercise (Tai Chi and yoga).

Conclusions: Based on the available evidence, exercise is helpful to alleviate NP intensity. Therefore, these expert consensuses recommend that proper exercise programs can be considered as an effective alternative treatment or complementary therapy for most patients with NP. The expert consensus provided medical staff and policymakers with applicable recommendations for the formulation of exercise prescription for NP. This consensus statement will require regular updates after five–ten years.

Nonsurgical Treatment Options for Muscle Contractures in Individuals With Neurologic Disorders: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether nonsurgical treatment can reduce muscle contractures in individuals with neurologic disorders. The primary outcome measure was muscle contractures measured as joint mobility or passive stiffness.

DATA SOURCES

Embase, MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health, and Physiotherapy Evidence Database in June-July 2019 and again in July 2020.

STUDY SELECTION

The search resulted in 8020 records, which were screened by 2 authors based on our patient, intervention, comparison, outcome criteria. We included controlled trials of nonsurgical interventions administered to treat muscle contractures in individuals with neurologic disorders.

DATA EXTRACTION

Authors, participant characteristics, intervention details, and joint mobility/passive stiffness before and after intervention were extracted. We assessed trials for risk of bias using the Downs and Black checklist. We conducted meta-analyses investigating the short-term effect on joint mobility using a random-effects model with the pooled effect from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) as the primary outcome. The minimal clinically important effect was set at 5°.

DATA SYNTHESIS

A total of 70 trials (57 RCTs) were eligible for inclusion. Stretch had a pooled effect of 3° (95% CI, 1-4°; prediction interval (PI)=-2 to 7°; I 2=66%; P<.001), and robot-assisted rehabilitation had an effect of 1 (95% CI, 0-2; PI=-8 to 9; I 2=73%; P=.03). We found no effect of shockwave therapy (P=.56), physical activity (P=.27), electrical stimulation (P=.11), or botulinum toxin (P=.13). Although trials were generally of moderate to high quality according to the Downs and Black checklist, only 18 of the 70 trials used objective measures of muscle contractures. In 23 trials, nonobjective measures were used without use of assessor-blinding.

CONCLUSIONS

We did not find convincing evidence supporting the use of any nonsurgical treatment option. We recommend that controlled trials using objective measures of muscle contractures and a sufficiently large number of participants be performed.