Prevalence and factors influencing the occurrence of spasticity in stroke patients: a retrospective study

Extracorporeal Shockwave Treatment as Additional Therapy in Patients with Post-Stroke Spasticity of Upper Limb-A Narrative Review

Stroke is a severe injury of the central nervous system (CNS) and one of the leading causes of long-term disability and mortality. One of the main symptoms of neurological diseases is spasticity. This is defined as a motor condition characterized by a velocity-dependent increase in tonic stretch reflexes with exaggerated tendon jerks and resulting in the hyperexcitability of the stretch reflex. Rehabilitation after a stroke is focused on relearning lost skills and regaining independence. Many new methods in neurorehabilitation have been introduced. This review concentrates on the current evidence for extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) as a noninvasive alternative to treat spasticity. We present the effect of EWST and radial EWST interventions to post-stroke patients with spasticity in the upper limb. Our collected data suggest that different parameters of shockwaves can be used to achieve functional improvementsin the upper limb after a stroke. Our accumulated data imply that ESWT is safe and can be used for pain relief, reduced muscle tension, and an increased range of motion. According to many studies, complications after shockwave treatment are infrequent. Transient complications after shockwave therapy (ESWT) include redness, tingling, pain, and bruising. We reviewed clinical trials that present the possible benefits in upper-limb function after shockwave therapy for post-stroke patients. In this article, we used many database search engines, including PEDro. In the stroke rehabilitation literature, a key methodological problem is the design of double-blind studies, which very often are not feasible.

Acupuncture for post-stroke spasticity: An overview of systematic reviews

BACKGROUND

Post-stroke spasticity (PSS) is the most common complication of stroke. Acupuncture is widely used in clinical practice for the treatment of PSS, and is therefore considered a common complementary treatment. Several systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses (MAs) have demonstrated the efficacy and safety of acupuncture in the treatment of PSS; however, the quality of evidence of these studies has not been adequately assessed.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate and summarize the SRs/MAs and inform future research and clinical practice on the efficacy and safety of acupuncture for PSS.

DATA SOURCES AND EXTRACION

The following databases were searched from their dates of inception to March 26, 2023: PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Library, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Database, SinoMed, and Chinese Science and Technology Periodical Database (VIP), and grey literature were manually searched. Two reviewers independently completed literature retrieval, screening, and data extraction.

REVIEW APPRAISAL

Systematic evaluation tools to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) 2, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA 2020 Checklist), and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system were used to systematically evaluate the methodological, reporting, and evidence quality of the SRs/MAs.

RESULTS

Overall, 226 papers were examined, and after careful consideration, 10 SRs/MAs were deemed eligible for inclusion. The AMSTAR 2 assessment revealed that one SR/MA had medium, one study had low, and the remaining eight studies had critically low methodological qualities. Additionally, four SRs/MAs completed more than 60 % of the PRISMA 2020 checklist. The GRADE system indicated that six outcomes were medium, 26 outcomes were low, and 24 outcomes were critically low.

CONCLUSION

Based on the evidence, acupuncture may be a promising complementary treatment to improve post-stroke spasticity and quality of life. Further high-quality RCTs are needed in future studies to support the broader application of acupuncture for the treatment of PSS.

Effects of repetitive peripheral magnetic stimulation for the upper limb after stroke: Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Introduction

Repetitive peripheral magnetic stimulation (rPMS) can stimulate profound neuromuscular tissues painlessly to evoke action potentials in motor axons and induce muscle contraction for treating neurological conditions. It has been increasingly used in stroke rehabilitation as an easy-to-administer approach for therapeutic neuromodulation.

Objective

We performed this meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to systematically evaluate the effects of rPMS for the upper limb in patients with stroke, including motor impairment, muscle spasticity, muscle strength, and activity limitation outcomes.

Methods

The meta-analysis was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline. PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) were searched for articles published before June 2022. Forest plots were employed to estimate the pooled results of the included studies, and the I2 statistical analysis was used to identify the source of heterogeneity. Publication bias was examined by Egger's regression tests or visual inspection of the funnel plots.

Results

The database searches yielded 1052 potential eligible literature; of them, five randomized controlled trials met the eligible criteria, involving a total of 188 participants. Patients in the rPMS group showed better improvement in motor impairment as measured by the FM-UE (MD: 5.39 [95% CI, 4.26 to 6.52]; P < 0.001; I2 = 0%) compared with the control group. Among the secondary outcomes, no difference was found in the improvement of muscle spasticity (SMD: 0.36 [95% CI, -0.05 to 0.77]; P = 0.08; I2 = 41%). There was a significant difference in the proximal (SMD: 0.58 [95% CI, 0.10 to 1.06]; P = 0.02; I2 = 0%) but not the distal muscle strength (SMD: 1.18 [95% CI, -1.00 to 3.36]; P = 0.29; I2 = 93%). Moreover, the activity limitation outcomes were significantly improved with rPMS intervention (SMD: 0.59 [95% CI, 0.08 to 1.10]; P = 0.02; I2 = 0%).

Conclusion

This meta-analysis showed that rPMS might improve upper limb motor impairment, proximal muscle strength, and activity limitation outcomes but not muscle spasticity and distal strength in patients after stroke. Due to the limited number of studies, further randomized clinical trials are still warranted for more accurate interpretation and clinical recommendation.