Effects of a robot intervention on visuospatial hemineglect in postacute stroke patients: a randomized controlled trial

Short- and Long-Term Effects of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation on Poststroke Visuospatial Neglect: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and select a suitable protocol for poststroke visuospatial neglect.

DESIGN

PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases were searched for relevant studies from the inception date to October 31, 2021. The inclusion criteria were (1) randomized controlled trials, (2) people with visuospatial neglect, (3) treatment with different repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation protocols, (4) comparison with sham or blank control, and (5) reports of performance measurements.

RESULTS

Data were obtained from 11 randomized controlled trials. The effects of immediate and 1-mo postintervention were measured using line bisection test, cancellation test, and Catherine Bergego Scale. Results showed statistically significant improvement when applying low-frequency (0.5-1 Hz) repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation or continuous theta burst stimulation to the left hemisphere on short- and long-term line bisection test (standardized mean difference = -1.10, 95% confidence interval = -1.84 to -0.37; standardized mean difference = -1.25, 95% confidence interval = -2.11 to -0.39) and cancellation test (standardized mean difference = 1.08, 95% confidence interval = 0.45 to 1.71; standardized mean difference = 1.45, 95% confidence interval = 0.42, 2.47).

CONCLUSIONS

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation may be considered a treatment option for poststroke visuospatial neglect. This review proves that a decrease in neuronal excitation in the left hemisphere, which restores the interhemispheric balance, benefits poststroke visuospatial neglect.

Artificial intelligence in elderly healthcare: A scoping review

The ageing population has led to a surge in the adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies in elderly healthcare worldwide. However, in the advancement of AI technologies, there is currently a lack of clarity about the types and roles of AI technologies in elderly healthcare. This scoping review aimed to provide a comprehensive overview of AI technologies in elderly healthcare by exploring the types of AI technologies employed, and identifying their roles in elderly healthcare based on existing studies. A total of 10 databases were searched for this review, from January 1 2000 to July 31 2022. Based on the inclusion criteria, 105 studies were included. The AI devices utilized in elderly healthcare were summarised as robots, exoskeleton devices, intelligent homes, AI-enabled health smart applications and wearables, voice-activated devices, and virtual reality. Five roles of AI technologies were identified: rehabilitation therapists, emotional supporters, social facilitators, supervisors, and cognitive promoters. Results showed that the impact of AI technologies on elderly healthcare is promising and that AI technologies are capable of satisfying the unmet care needs of older adults and demonstrating great potential in its further development in this area. More well-designed randomised controlled trials are needed in the future to validate the roles of AI technologies in elderly healthcare.

Unilateral Spatial Neglect Recovery Poststroke

Unilateral spatial neglect (USN) is a common and disabling cognitive consequence of stroke wherein individuals demonstrate decreased response to contralesional information. Here, we provide an updated narrative review of studies that shed light on the neural mechanisms and predictors of recovery of USN. Additionally, we report a rapid review of randomized controlled trials focusing on USN intervention, both nonpharmacological and pharmacological, published in the last 5 years. Randomized controlled trials are reviewed within the context of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of USN interventions published within the same time frame. The quality of randomized controlled trials of treatment is higher compared to quality reported in previous reviews and meta-analyses. However, remaining weaknesses in participant demographic reporting, as well as small, heterogenous samples, render generalizability and cross-study interpretation a challenge. Nevertheless, evidence regarding neural mechanisms underlying USN recovery and regarding the effectiveness of targeted USN interventions is accumulating and strengthening, setting the foundation for future investigations into patient-specific factors that may influence treatment response. We identify gaps and provide suggestions for future USN intervention research.

Occupational therapy for cognitive impairment in stroke patients

BACKGROUND

Cognitive impairment is a frequent consequence of stroke and can impact on a person's ability to perform everyday activities. Occupational therapists use a range of interventions when working with people who have cognitive impairment poststroke. This is an update of a Cochrane Review published in 2010.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the impact of occupational therapy on activities of daily living (ADL), both basic and instrumental, global cognitive function, and specific cognitive abilities in people who have cognitive impairment following a stroke.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, four other databases (all last searched September 2020), trial registries, and reference lists.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials that evaluated an intervention for adults with clinically defined stroke and confirmed cognitive impairment. The intervention needed either to be provided by an occupational therapist or considered within the scope of occupational therapy practice as defined in the review. We excluded studies focusing on apraxia or perceptual impairments or virtual reality interventions as these are covered by other Cochrane Reviews. The primary outcome was basic activities of daily living (BADL) such as dressing, feeding, and bathing. Secondary outcomes were instrumental ADL (IADL) (e.g. shopping and meal preparation), community integration and participation, global cognitive function and specific cognitive abilities (including attention, memory, executive function, or a combination of these), and subdomains of these abilities. We included both observed and self-reported outcome measures.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies that met the inclusion criteria, extracted data, and assessed the certainty of the evidence. A third review author moderated disagreements if consensus was not reached. We contacted trial authors for additional information and data, where available. We assessed the certainty of key outcomes using GRADE.  MAIN RESULTS: We included 24 trials from 11 countries involving 1142 (analysed) participants (two weeks to eight years since stroke onset). This update includes 23 new trials in addition to the one study included in the previous version. Most were parallel randomised controlled trials except for one cross-over trial and one with a two-by-two factorial design. Most studies had sample sizes under 50 participants. Twenty studies involved a remediation approach to cognitive rehabilitation, particularly using computer-based interventions. The other four involved a compensatory and adaptive approach. The length of interventions ranged from 10 days to 18 weeks, with a mean total length of 19 hours. Control groups mostly received usual rehabilitation or occupational therapy care, with a few receiving an attention control that was comparable to usual care; two had no intervention (i.e. a waiting list). Apart from high risk of performance bias for all but one of the studies, the risk of bias for other aspects was mostly low or unclear.  For the primary outcome of BADL, meta-analysis found a small effect on completion of the intervention with a mean difference (MD) of 2.26 on the Functional Independence Measure (FIM) (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.17 to 4.22; P = 0.03, I2 = 0%; 6 studies, 336 participants; low-certainty evidence). Therefore, on average, BADL improved by 2.26 points on the FIM that ranges from 18 (total assist) to 126 (complete independence). On follow-up, there was insufficient evidence of an effect at three months (MD 10.00, 95% CI -0.54 to 20.55; P = 0.06, I2 = 53%; 2 studies, 73 participants; low-certainty evidence), but evidence of an effect at six months (MD 11.38, 95% CI 1.62 to 21.14, I2 = 12%; 2 studies, 73 participants; low-certainty evidence). These differences are below 22 points which is the established minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for the FIM for people with stroke. For IADL, the evidence is very uncertain about an effect (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.94, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.47; P = 0.0005, I2 = 98%; 2 studies, 88 participants). For community integration, we found insufficient evidence of an effect (SMD 0.09, 95% CI -0.35 to 0.54; P = 0.68, I2 = 0%; 2 studies, 78 participants). There was an improvement of clinical importance in global cognitive functional performance after the intervention (SMD 0.35, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.54; P = 0.0004, I2 = 0%; 9 studies, 432 participants; low-certainty evidence), equating to 1.63 points on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) (95% CI 0.75 to 2.52), which exceeds the anchor-based MCID of the MoCA for stroke rehabilitation patients of 1.22. We found some effect for attention overall (SMD -0.31, 95% CI -0.47 to -0.15; P = 0.0002, I2 = 20%; 13 studies, 620 participants; low-certainty evidence), equating to a difference of 17.31 seconds (95% CI 8.38 to 26.24), and for executive functional performance overall (SMD 0.49, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.66; P < 0.00001, I2 = 74%; 11 studies, 550 participants; very low-certainty evidence), equating to 1.41 points on the Frontal Assessment Battery (range: 0-18). Of the cognitive subdomains, we found evidence of effect of possible clinical importance, immediately after intervention, for sustained visual attention (moderate certainty) equating to 15.63 seconds, for working memory (low certainty) equating to 59.9 seconds, and thinking flexibly (low certainty), compared to control.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The effectiveness of occupational therapy for cognitive impairment poststroke remains unclear. Occupational therapy may result in little to no clinical difference in BADL immediately after intervention and at three and six months' follow-up. Occupational therapy may slightly improve global cognitive performance of a clinically important difference immediately after intervention, likely improves sustained visual attention slightly, and may slightly increase working memory and flexible thinking after intervention. There is evidence of low or very low certainty or insufficient evidence for effect on other cognitive domains, IADL, and community integration and participation.  Given the low certainty of much of the evidence in our review, more research is needed to support or refute the effectiveness of occupational therapy for cognitive impairment after stroke. Future trials need improved methodology to address issues including risk of bias and to better report the outcome measures and interventions used.

eHealth in Geriatric Rehabilitation: Systematic Review of Effectiveness, Feasibility, and Usability

BACKGROUND

eHealth has the potential to improve outcomes such as physical activity or balance in older adults receiving geriatric rehabilitation. However, several challenges such as scarce evidence on effectiveness, feasibility, and usability hinder the successful implementation of eHealth in geriatric rehabilitation.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this systematic review was to assess evidence on the effectiveness, feasibility, and usability of eHealth interventions in older adults in geriatric rehabilitation.

METHODS

We searched 7 databases for randomized controlled trials, nonrandomized studies, quantitative descriptive studies, qualitative research, and mixed methods studies that applied eHealth interventions during geriatric rehabilitation. Included studies investigated a combination of effectiveness, usability, and feasibility of eHealth in older patients who received geriatric rehabilitation, with a mean age of ≥70 years. Quality was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool and a narrative synthesis was conducted using a harvest plot.

RESULTS

In total, 40 studies were selected, with clinical heterogeneity across studies. Of 40 studies, 15 studies (38%) found eHealth was at least as effective as non-eHealth interventions (56% of the 27 studies with a control group), 11 studies (41%) found eHealth interventions were more effective than non-eHealth interventions, and 1 study (4%) reported beneficial outcomes in favor of the non-eHealth interventions. Of 17 studies, 16 (94%) concluded that eHealth was feasible. However, high exclusion rates were reported in 7 studies of 40 (18%). Of 40 studies, 4 (10%) included outcomes related to usability and indicated that there were certain aging-related barriers to cognitive ability, physical ability, or perception, which led to difficulties in using eHealth.

CONCLUSIONS

eHealth can potentially improve rehabilitation outcomes for older patients receiving geriatric rehabilitation. Simple eHealth interventions were more likely to be feasible for older patients receiving geriatric rehabilitation, especially, in combination with another non-eHealth intervention. However, a lack of evidence on usability might hamper the implementation of eHealth. eHealth applications in geriatric rehabilitation show promise, but more research is required, including research with a focus on usability and participation.

Robot-Assisted Arm Training in Stroke Individuals With Unilateral Spatial Neglect: A Pilot Study

Background: Robot-assisted arm training (RAT) is an innovative exercise-based therapy that provides highly intensive, adaptive, and task-specific training, yet its effects for stroke individuals with unilateral spatial neglect remain to be explored. The study was aimed to investigate the effects of RAT on unilateral spatial neglect, arm motor function, activities of daily living, and social participation after stroke.

Methods: In a pilot randomized controlled trial, individuals with unilateral spatial neglect after right hemisphere stroke were equally allocated to intervention group and control group, 45-min training daily, 5 days/week, for 4 weeks. Outcome measures included the Behavioral Inattention Test-conventional section (BIT-C), Catherine Bergego Scale (CBS), Fugl-Meyer Assessment for Upper Extremity (FMA-UE), Modified Barthel Index (MBI), and World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule Version 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0).

Results: From November 2018 to February 2021, 20 stroke patients (mean age 47.40 ± 8.47) were enrolled in the study. Robot-assisted arm training was feasible and safe for individuals with unilateral spatial neglect. Both groups had significant improvements in all outcome measures. Participants assigned to RAT therapy had significantly greater improvements in BIT-C (difference, 7.70; 95% CI, 0.55–14.85, P = 0.04), FMA-UE (difference, 5.10; 95% CI, 1.52–8.68, P = 0.01), and WHODAS 2.0 (difference, −7.30; 95% CI, −12.50 to −2.10, P = 0.01). However, the change scores on CBS and MBI demonstrated no significance between the groups.

Conclusion: Our findings provide preliminary support for introducing robot-assisted arm training to remediate unilateral spatial neglect after stroke. The training program focusing on neglect of contralateral space and affected upper extremity may be effective in neglect symptoms, motor function recovery, and social participation, while not generalizing into improvements in activities of daily living.

Clinical Trial Registration: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (http://www.chictr.org.cn/) on 17 October 2019, identifier: ChiCTR1900026656.

Non-pharmacological interventions for spatial neglect or inattention following stroke and other non-progressive brain injury

BACKGROUND

People with spatial neglect after stroke or other brain injury have difficulty attending to one side of space. Various rehabilitation interventions have been used, but evidence of their benefit is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

The main objective was to determine the effects of non-pharmacological interventions for people with spatial neglect after stroke and other adult-acquired non-progressive brain injury.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched October 2020), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; last searched October 2020), MEDLINE (1966 to October 2020), Embase (1980 to October 2020), the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL; 1983 to October 2020), and PsycINFO (1974 to October 2020). We also searched ongoing trials registers and screened reference lists.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of any non-pharmacological intervention specifically aimed at spatial neglect. We excluded studies of general rehabilitation and studies with mixed participant groups, unless separate neglect data were available.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Review authors categorised the interventions into eight broad types deemed to be applicable to clinical practice through iterative discussion: visual interventions, prism adaptation, body awareness interventions, mental function interventions, movement interventions, non-invasive brain stimulation, electrical stimulation, and acupuncture. We assessed the quality of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 65 RCTs with 1951 participants, all of which included people with spatial neglect following stroke. Most studies measured outcomes using standardised neglect assessments. Fifty-one studies measured effects on ADL immediately after completion of the intervention period; only 16 reported persisting effects on ADL (our primary outcome). One study (30 participants) reported discharge destination, and one (24 participants) reported depression. No studies reported falls, balance, or quality of life. Only two studies were judged to be entirely at low risk of bias, and all were small, with fewer than 50 participants per group. We found no definitive (phase 3) clinical trials. None of the studies reported any patient or public involvement. Visual interventions versus any control: evidence is very uncertain about the effects of visual interventions for spatial neglect based on measures of persisting functional ability in ADL (2 studies, 55 participants) (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.57 to 0.49); measures of immediate functional ability in ADL; persisting standardised neglect assessments; and immediate neglect assessments. Prism adaptation versus any control: evidence is very uncertain about the effects of prism adaptation for spatial neglect based on measures of persisting functional ability in ADL (2 studies, 39 participants) (SMD -0.29, 95% CI -0.93 to 0.35); measures of immediate functional ability in ADL; persisting standardised neglect assessments; and immediate neglect assessments. Body awareness interventions versus any control: evidence is very uncertain about the effects of body awareness interventions for spatial neglect based on measures of persisting functional ability in ADL (5 studies, 125 participants) (SMD 0.61, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.97); measures of immediate functional ability in ADL; persisting standardised neglect assessments; immediate neglect assessments; and adverse events. Mental function interventions versus any control: we found no trials of mental function interventions for spatial neglect reporting on measures of persisting functional ability in ADL. Evidence is very uncertain about the effects of mental function interventions on spatial neglect based on measures of immediate functional ability in ADL and immediate neglect assessments. Movement interventions versus any control: we found no trials of movement interventions for spatial neglect reporting on measures of persisting functional ability in ADL. Evidence is very uncertain about the effects of body awareness interventions on spatial neglect based on measures of immediate functional ability in ADL and immediate neglect assessments. Non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) versus any control: evidence is very uncertain about the effects of NIBS on spatial neglect based on measures of persisting functional ability in ADL (3 studies, 92 participants) (SMD 0.35, 95% CI -0.08 to 0.77); measures of immediate functional ability in ADL; persisting standardised neglect assessments; immediate neglect assessments; and adverse events. Electrical stimulation versus any control: we found no trials of electrical stimulation for spatial neglect reporting on measures of persisting functional ability in ADL. Evidence is very uncertain about the effects of electrical stimulation on spatial neglect based on immediate neglect assessments. Acupuncture versus any control: we found no trials of acupuncture for spatial neglect reporting on measures of persisting functional ability in ADL. Evidence is very uncertain about the effects of acupuncture on spatial neglect based on measures of immediate functional ability in ADL and immediate neglect assessments.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions for spatial neglect in improving functional ability in ADL and increasing independence remains unproven. Many strategies have been proposed to aid rehabilitation of spatial neglect, but none has yet been sufficiently researched through high-quality fully powered randomised trials to establish potential or adverse effects. As a consequence, no rehabilitation approach can be supported or refuted based on current evidence from RCTs. As recommended by a number of national clinical guidelines, clinicians should continue to provide rehabilitation for neglect that enables people to meet their rehabilitation goals. Clinicians and stroke survivors should have the opportunity, and are strongly encouraged, to participate in research. Future studies need to have appropriate high-quality methodological design, delivery, and reporting to enable appraisal and interpretation of results. Future studies also must evaluate outcomes of importance to patients, such as persisting functional ability in ADL. One way to improve the quality of research is to involve people with experience with the condition in designing and running trials.

Neglect syndrome in post-stroke conditions: assessment and treatment (scoping review)

There is no consensus about the definition or most effective treatment for neglect syndrome. The aim of this review was therefore to evaluate the results of trials that investigated different treatment methods for neglect syndrome. A systematic literature search in PubMed and Web of Science databases was performed to identify studies that investigated the effects of neglect therapies. Authors followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. Studies were selected by two assayers, and disagreement was resolved by a third reviewer. The literature search identified 202 articles: 19 met the inclusion criteria and were included for data extraction. Thirty-five different kinds of assessments were used in these studies, and 17 treatment methods were applied. Successful treatments were reported at least in some parts of the assessments in 12 studies: mirror therapy (in two trials), transcranial magnetic stimulation, street crossing test in virtual reality, smooth pursuit eye movement training, saccadic eye movement therapy, direct current stimulation, eye patching therapy, prism adaptation treatment, socially assistive pet-type therapeutic robot (PARO), Kinesiological Instrument for Normal and Altered Reaching Movement robotic device therapy, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, and optokinetic stimulation (the last two methods in the same trial). No success was shown in seven trials, which contained not only single treatments but combined ones also. Authors concluded that there are no convincing results for or against any of the different therapies used for neglect syndrome. The quality of the trials is questionable, and the numbers of included patients are small in the trials.