Home-based nerve stimulation to enhance effects of motor training in patients in the chronic phase after stroke: a proof-of-principle study

Effects of home-based neurostimulation on outcomes after stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Home-based rehabilitation is a cost-effective means of making services available for patients. The aim of this study is to determine the evidence in the literature on the effects of home-based neurostimulation in patients with stroke.

METHOD

We searched PubMED, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and CENTRAL for randomized controlled trials on the subject matter using keywords such as stroke, electrical stimulation and transcranial direct current stimulation. Information on participants' characteristics and mean scores on the outcomes of interest were extracted. Risks of bias and methodological quality of the included studies were assessed using Cochrane Risks of bias tool and PEDro scale respectively. The data was analyzed using both narrative and quantitative syntheses. In the quantitative synthesis, meta-analysis was carried out using random effect model analysis.

RESULT

The results showed that, home-based neurostimulation is superior to the control at improving upper limb muscle strength (SMD = 0.72, 95% CI = 0.08 to 1.32, p = 0.03), functional mobility (SMD = -0.39, 95% CI = -0.65 to 0.14, p = 0.003) and walking endurance (SMD = 0.33, 95% CI = 0.08 to 0.59, p = 0.01) post intervention; and upper limb motor function (SMD = 0.9, 95% CI = 0.10 to 1.70, p = 0.03), functional mobility (SMD = -0.30, 95% CI = -0.56 to -0.05, p = 0.02) and walking endurance (SMD = 0.33, 95% CI = 0.08 to 0.59, p = 0.01) at follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Home-based neurostimulation can be used to improve upper and lower limb function after stroke.

Sensory Stimulation and Robot-Assisted Arm Training after Stroke: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Functional recovery after stroke is often limited, despite various treatment methods such as robot-assisted therapy. Repetitive sensory stimulation (RSS) might be a promising add-on therapy that is thought to directly drive plasticity processes. First positive effects on sensorimotor function have been shown. However, clinical studies are scarce, and the effect of RSS combined with robot-assisted training has not been evaluated yet. Therefore, our objective was to investigate the feasibility and sensorimotor effects of RSS (compared to a control group receiving sham stimulation) followed by robot-assisted arm therapy.

METHODS

Forty participants in the subacute phase (4.4-23.9 weeks) after stroke with a moderate to severe arm paresis were randomized to RSS or control group. Participants received 12 sessions of (sham-) stimulation within 3 weeks. Stimulation of the fingertips and the robot-assisted therapy were each applied in 45-min sessions. Motor and sensory outcome assessments (e.g. Fugl-Meyer-Assessment, grip strength) were measured at baseline, post intervention and at a 3-week follow-up.

RESULTS

Participants in both groups improved their sensorimotor function from baseline to post and follow-up measurements, as illustrated by most motor and sensory outcome assessments. However, no significant group effects were found for any measures at any time (P > 0.058). Stimulations were well accepted, no safety issues arose.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Feasibility of robot-assisted therapy with preceding RSS in persons with moderate to severe paresis was demonstrated. However, RSS preceding robot-assisted training failed to show a preliminary effect compared to the control intervention. Participants might have been too severely affected to identify changes driven by the RSS, or these might have been diluted or more difficult to identify because of the additional robotic training and neurorehabilitation.

VIDEO ABSTRACT AVAILABLE

for more insights from the authors (see the Video, Supplemental Digital Content 1, available at: http://links.lww.com/JNPT/A478).

Repetitive peripheral sensory stimulation for motor recovery after stroke: a scoping review

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Enhancing afferent information from the paretic limb can improve post-stroke motor recovery. However, uncertainties exist regarding varied sensory peripheral neuromodulation protocols and their specific impacts. This study outlines the use of repetitive peripheral sensory stimulation (RPSS) and repetitive magnetic stimulation (rPMS) in individuals with stroke.

METHODS

This scoping review was conducted according to the JBI Evidence Synthesis guidelines. We searched studies published until June 2023 on several databases using a three-step analysis and categorization of the studies: pre-analysis, exploration of the material, and data processing.

RESULTS

We identified 916 studies, 52 of which were included (N = 1,125 participants). Approximately 53.84% of the participants were in the chronic phase, displaying moderate-to-severe functional impairment. Thirty-two studies used RPSS often combining it with task-oriented training, while 20 used rPMS as a standalone intervention. The RPSS primarily targeted the median and ulnar nerves, stimulating for an average of 92.78 min at an intensity that induced paresthesia. RPMS targeted the upper and lower limb paretic muscles, employing a 20 Hz frequency in most studies. The mean stimulation time was 12.74 min, with an intensity of 70% of the maximal stimulator output. Among the 114 variables analyzed in the 52 studies, 88 (77.20%) were in the "s,b" domain, with 26 (22.8%) falling under the "d" domain of the ICF.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Sensory peripheral neuromodulation protocols hold the potential for enhancing post-stroke motor recovery, yet optimal outcomes were obtained when integrated with intensive or task-oriented motor training.

Some home-based self-managed rehabilitation interventions can improve arm activity after stroke: A systematic review and narrative synthesis

Background

There is an increased need for home-based, self-managed, and low maintenance stroke rehabilitation as well as interest in targeting the arm, which often lags behind leg recovery. Previous reviews have not controlled for concurrent standard of care and the ratio of self-managed care to therapist input.

Objectives

To determine the effectiveness of home-based, self-managed and low maintenance programs for upper-limb motor recovery in individuals after stroke. A secondary objective explored the adherence to home-based self-managed programs.

Data sources

We searched PubMed (1809-present), Embase (embase.com, 1974-present), Cochrane CENTRAL Register of Controlled Trials (Wiley), CINAHL (EBSCOhost, 1937-present), Physiotherapy Evidence Database (pedro.org.au), OTseeker (otseeker.com), and REHABDATA (National Rehabilitation Information Center). All searches were completed on June 9, 2022. Bibliographic references of included articles also were searched.

Eligibility criteria

Randomized controlled trials (RCT) in adults after stroke, where both intervention and control were home-based, at least 75% self-managed and did not involve concurrent therapy as a confounding factor. Primary outcome was performance in functional motor activities after training. Secondary outcome was sensorimotor impairment. All outcomes after a retention period were also considered secondary outcomes.

Data collection and analysis

Two review authors independently screened titles/abstracts, three review authors screened full papers and extracted data, and two review authors undertook assessment of risk of bias (i.e., allocation bias, measurement bias, confounding factors) using the NHLBI Study Quality Assessment Tool.

Main results

We identified seven heterogenous studies, including five with fair to good quality. All studies had an alternative treatment, dose-equivalent control. Only one trial reported a positive, sustained, between-group effect on activity for the experimental group. The remaining studies reported seven interventions having a within-group training effect with three interventions having sustained effects at follow up. One study reported a between group effect on an impairment measure with no follow-up. Overall adherence rates were high, but three studies reported differential group rates. Compliance with daily logs was higher when the logs were collected on a weekly basis.

Limitations

By excluding studies that allowed concurrent therapy, we likely minimized the number of studies that included participants in the early sub-acute post-stroke stage. By focusing on RCTs, we are unable to comment on other potentially promising home-based, self-managed single cohort programs. By including only published and English language studies, we may have included publication bias.

Conclusions and implications

There is some evidence that a variety of home-based, self-managed training program can be beneficial after stroke. Future research could compare such programs with natural history controls. Clinicians might utilize home exercise programs with explicit directions and some form of weekly contact to aid compliance.

Effectiveness of home-based upper limb rehabilitation in stroke survivors: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Home-based training is an alternative option to provide intensive rehabilitation without costly supervised therapy. Though several studies support the effectiveness of home-based rehabilitation in improving hemiparetic upper limb function in stroke survivors, a collective evaluation of the evidence remains scarce.

Objectives

This study aims to determine the effects of home-based upper limb rehabilitation for hemiparetic upper limb recovery in stroke survivors.

Methods

The databases of the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Web of Science were systematically searched from January 2000 to September 2020. Only randomized, controlled, and cross-over trials that evaluated the effects of home-based upper limb interventions were selected. The Pedro scale was used to assess the methodological quality of the studies. A meta-analysis of the upper limb function outcomes was performed by calculating the mean difference/standardized mean difference using a fixed/random effect model.

Results

An initial search yielded 1,049 articles. Twenty-six articles were included in the review. The pooled evidence of the meta-analysis showed that home-based upper limb intervention was more effective in improving upper limb function [SMD: 0.28, 95% CI (0.12, 0.44), I² = 0%, p < 0.001, fixed effect model] than conventional therapy. When comparing two types of home-based interventions, subgroup analysis revealed that home-based technology treatment—electrical stimulation—provided more significant improvement in upper limb function than treatment without the use of technology (SMD: 0.64, 95% CI (0.21, 1.07), I² = 0%, p = 0.003, random effect model).

Conclusion

The beneficial effects of home-based upper limb interventions were superior to conventional therapy in improving function and perceived use of the hemiparetic upper limb in daily activities. Among the home-based interventions, home-based electrical stimulation seemed to provide the most optimal benefits.

Effects of Repetitive Peripheral Sensory Stimulation in the Subacute and Chronic Phases After Stroke: Study Protocol for a Pilot Randomized Trial

Background

Repetitive peripheral nerve sensory stimulation (RPSS) is a potential add-on intervention to motor training for rehabilitation of upper limb paresis after stroke. Benefits of RPSS were reported in subjects in the chronic phase after stroke, but there is limited information about the effects of this intervention within the 1st weeks or months. The primary goal of this study is to compare, in a head-to-head proof-of-principle study, the impact of a single session of suprasensory vs. subsensory RPSS on the upper limb motor performance and learning in subjects at different phases after stroke subacute and chronic phases and mild upper limb motor impairments after stroke. In addition, we examine the effects of RPSS on brain perfusion, functional imaging activation, and γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA) levels. Subjects with mild upper limb motor impairments will be tested with MRI and clinical assessment either at an early (7 days to 3 months post-stroke) or at a chronic (>6 months) stage after stroke.

Methods

In this multicenter, randomized, parallel-group, proof-of-principle clinical trial with blinded assessment of outcomes, we compare the effects of one session of suprasensory or subsensory RPSS in patients with ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke and upper limb paresis. Clinical assessment and MRI will be performed only once in each subject (either at an early or at a chronic stage). The primary outcome is the change in performance in the Jebsen–Taylor test. Secondary outcomes: hand strength, cerebral blood flow assessed with arterial spin labeling, changes in the blood oxygenation level-dependent (BOLD) effect in ipsilesional and contralesional primary motor cortex (M1) on the left and the right hemispheres assessed with functional MRI (fMRI) during a finger-tapping task performed with the paretic hand, and changes in GABA levels in ipsilesional and contralesional M1 evaluated with spectroscopy. The changes in outcomes will be compared in four groups: suprasensory, early; subsensory, early; suprasensory, chronic; and subsensory, chronic.

Discussion

The results of this study are relevant to inform future clinical trials to tailor RPSS to patients more likely to benefit from this intervention.

Trial Registration

NCT03956407.

Sensory-Based Priming for Upper Extremity Hemiparesis After Stroke: A Scoping Review

Sensory priming is a technique to facilitate neuroplasticity and improve motor skills after injury. Common sensory priming modalities include peripheral nerve stimulation/somatosensory electrical stimulation (PNS/SES), transient functional deafferentation (TFD), and vibration. The aim of this study was to determine whether sensory priming with a motor intervention results in improved upper limb motor impairment or function after stroke. PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Web of Science, and EMBASE were the databases used to search the literature in July 2020. This scoping review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement and recommendations for the Cochrane collaboration. In total, 30 studies were included in the analysis: three studies examined TFD, 16 examined PNS/SES, 10 studied vibration, and one combined the three stimulation techniques. Most studies reported significant improvements for participants receiving sensory priming. Given the low risk, it may be advantageous to use sensory-based priming prior to or concurrent with upper limb training after stroke.

The Effect of Priming on Outcomes of Task-Oriented Training for the Upper Extremity in Chronic Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Background. Priming results in a type of implicit memory that prepares the brain for a more plastic response, thereby changing behavior. New evidence in neurorehabilitation points to the use of priming interventions to optimize functional gains of the upper extremity in poststroke individuals. Objective. To determine the effects of priming on task-oriented training on upper extremity outcomes (body function and activity) in chronic stroke. Methods. The PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science, EMBASE, and PEDro databases were searched in October 2019. Outcome data were pooled into categories of measures considering the International Classification Functional (ICF) classifications of body function and activity. Means and standard deviations for each group were used to determine group effect sizes by calculating mean differences (MDs) and 95% confidence intervals via a fixed effects model. Heterogeneity among the included studies for each factor evaluated was measured using the I² statistic. Results. Thirty-six studies with 814 patients undergoing various types of task-oriented training were included in the analysis. Of these studies, 17 were associated with stimulation priming, 12 with sensory priming, 4 with movement priming, and 3 with action observation priming. Stimulation priming showed moderate-quality evidence of body function. Only the Wolf Motor Function Test (time) in the activity domain showed low-quality evidence. However, gains in motor function and in use of extremity members were measured by the Fugl-Meyer Assessment (UE-FMA). Regarding sensory priming, we found moderate-quality evidence and effect size for UE-FMA, corresponding to the body function domain (MD 4.77, 95% CI 3.25-6.29, Z = 6.15, P < .0001), and for the Action Research Arm Test, corresponding to the activity domain (MD 7.47, 95% CI 4.52-10.42, Z = 4.96, P < .0001). Despite the low-quality evidence, we found an effect size (MD 8.64, 95% CI 10.85-16.43, Z = 2.17, P = .003) in movement priming. Evidence for action observation priming was inconclusive. Conclusion. Combining priming and task-oriented training for the upper extremities of chronic stroke patients can be a promising intervention strategy. Studies that identify which priming techniques combined with task-oriented training for upper extremity function in chronic stroke yield effective outcomes in each ICF domain are needed and may be beneficial for the recovery of upper extremities poststroke.

Home program practices for supporting and measuring adherence in post-stroke rehabilitation: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

After stroke, individuals face a variety of impairments that impact function. Increasingly, rehabilitation for these impairments has moved into the community and home settings through the use of home programs. However, adherence to these programs is often low, limiting effectiveness.

OBJECTIVE

This scoping review investigated home program implementation and measurement of adherence with persons post-stroke to identify commonly reported practices and determine areas for further research.

METHODS

The electronic databases of PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and PEDro were searched. Studies focused on post-stroke rehabilitation with an independent home program were selected. Qualitative studies, commentaries, and single-case studies were excluded. Title and abstract screenings were completed by two reviewers with a third for tie-breaking. The full-text review was completed by two reviewers using consensus to resolve any differences. Of the 1,197 articles initially found only 6% (n = 70) met criteria for data extraction. Elements for data extraction included: type of study, area of intervention, description of home program, presence of strategies to support adherence, methods to measure adherence and reported adherence.

RESULTS

Most commonly reported strategies to support home practice were the use of technology, personalization, and written directions. Only 20 studies reported achieving adherence at or greater than 75% and 18 studies did not report adherence outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Future investigations that directly compare and identify the most effective strategies to support adherence to home programs for this population are warranted. The implementation of guidelines for reporting adherence to home programs is recommended.

Effectiveness of somatosensory interventions on somatosensory, motor and functional outcomes in the upper limb post-stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Research mainly focuses on motor recovery of the upper limb after stroke. Less attention has been paid to somatosensory recovery.

OBJECTIVE

To review and summarize the effect of upper limb somatosensory interventions on somatosensory impairment, motor impairment, functional activity and participation after stroke.

METHODS

Biomedical databases Ovid Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science, PEDro, and OTseeker were searched with an update in May 2018. Randomized controlled trials investigating the effect of somatosensory-specific interventions focusing on exteroceptive, proprioceptive or higher cortical somatosensory dysfunction, or any combination were eligible for inclusion. Quality of included studies were assessed using Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale. Standardized Mean Differences and Mean Differences and 95% confidence intervals were calculated and combined in meta-analyses.

RESULTS

Active somatosensory interventions did not show a significant effect on somatosensation and activity, but demonstrated a significant improvement in motor impairment (SMD = 0.73, 95% CI = 0.14 to 1.32). No study evaluating active somatosensory intervention included participation. Passive somatosensory interventions significantly improved light touch sensation (SMD = 1.13, 95% CI = 0.20 to 2.05). Passive somatosensory interventions did not show significant effects on proprioception and higher cortical somatosensation, motor impairment, activity and participation.

CONCLUSIONS

To date, there is low quality evidence suggesting active somatosensory interventions having a beneficial effect on upper limb impairment and very low quality evidence suggesting passive somatosensory interventions improving upper limb light touch sensation. There is a need for further well-designed trials of somatosensory rehabilitation post stroke.

Nerve Stimulation Enhances Task-Oriented Training for Moderate-to-Severe Hemiparesis 3-12 Months After Stroke: A Randomized Trial

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to determine whether somatosensory stimulation affects outcomes of motor training for moderate-to-severe upper limb hemiparesis less than 12 mos before stroke.

DESIGN

Fifty-five adults participated in 18 intervention sessions pairing 2 hours of active (n = 33) or sham (n = 22) somatosensory stimulation with 4 hours of intensive task-oriented motor training. Wolf Motor Function Test, Action Research Arm Test, Fugl-Meyer Assessment, and Stroke Impact Scale were administered at baseline, postintervention, and 1- and 4-mo follow-up.

RESULTS

Statistically significant between-groups differences favored the active condition on Wolf Motor Function Test at post (P = 0.04) and Action Research Arm Test at post (P = 0.02), 1 mo (P = 0.01), and 4 mos (P = 0.01) but favored the sham condition on Stroke Impact Scale at 1 mo (P = 0.03). There were no significant between-groups differences on Fugl-Meyer Assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

Somatosensory stimulation can improve objective outcomes of motor training for moderate-to-severe hemiparesis less than 12 mos after stroke, although it needs to be determined whether the magnitude of between-groups differences in this study is clinically relevant. Future studies should investigate the intervention's impact on disability and functional recovery for this population as well as neurophysiological mechanisms underlying intervention effects.

Chronicity of Stroke Does Not Affect Outcomes of Somatosensory Stimulation Paired With Task-Oriented Motor Training: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial

Objective

To determine whether chronicity influences outcomes of somatosensory stimulation paired with task-oriented motor training for participants with severe-to-moderate upper extremity hemiparesis.

Design

Spearman correlations were used to retrospectively analyze outcomes of a randomized trial.

Setting

University research laboratory at a rehabilitation hospital.

Participants

Adults, ranging between 3 and 12 months poststroke (N=55).

Interventions

About 18 sessions pairing either 2 hours of active (n=33) or sham (n=22) somatosensory stimulation with 4 hours of intensive task-oriented motor training.

Main Outcome Measures

The Wolf Motor Function Test (primary), Action Research Arm Test, Stroke Impact Scale, and Fugl-Meyer Assessment were collected as outcome measures. Analyses evaluated whether within-group chronicity correlated with pre-post changes on primary and secondary outcome measures of motor performance.

Results

Both groups exhibited improvements on all outcome measures. No significant correlations between chronicity poststroke and the amount of motor recovery were found.

Conclusion

Somatosensory stimulation improved motor recovery compared with sham treatment in cases of severe-to-moderate hemiparesis between 3 and 12 months poststroke; and the extent of recovery did not correlate with baseline levels of stroke chronicity. Future studies should investigate a wider period of inclusion, patterns of corticospinal reorganization, differences between cortical and subcortical strokes, and include long-term follow-up periods.

Does Sensory Retraining Improve Sensation and Sensorimotor Function Following Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Reduced sensation is experienced by one in two individuals following stroke, impacting both the ability to function independently and overall quality of life. Repetitive activation of sensory input using active and passive sensory-based interventions have been shown to enhance adaptive motor cortical plasticity, indicating a potential mechanism which may mediate recovery. However, rehabilitation specifically focusing on somatosensory function receives little attention.

Objectives: To investigate sensory-based interventions reported in the literature and determine the effectiveness to improve sensation and sensorimotor function of individuals following stroke.

Methods: Electronic databases and trial registries were searched from inception until November 2018, in addition to hand searching systematic reviews. Study selection included randomized controlled trials for adults of any stroke type with an upper and/or lower limb sensorimotor impairment. Participants all received a sensory-based intervention designed to improve activity levels or impairment, which could be compared with usual care, sham, or another intervention. The primary outcomes were change in activity levels related to sensorimotor function. Secondary outcomes were measures of impairment, participation or quality of life.

Results: A total of 38 study trials were included (n = 1,093 participants); 29 explored passive sensory training (somatosensory; peripheral nerve; afferent; thermal; sensory amplitude electrical stimulation), 6 active (sensory discrimination; perceptual learning; sensory retraining) and 3 hybrid (haptic-based augmented reality; sensory-based feedback devices). Meta-analyses (13 comparisons; 385 participants) demonstrated a moderate effect in favor of passive sensory training on improving a range of upper and lower limb activity measures following stroke. Narrative syntheses were completed for studies unable to be pooled due to heterogeneity of measures or insufficient data, evidence for active sensory training is limited however does show promise in improving sensorimotor function following stroke.

Conclusions: Findings from the meta-analyses and single studies highlight some support for the effectiveness of passive sensory training in relation to sensory impairment and motor function. However, evidence for active sensory training continues to be limited. Further high-quality research with rigorous methods (adequately powered with consistent outcome measures) is required to determine the effectiveness of sensory retraining in stroke rehabilitation, particularly for active sensory training.

Effectiveness of electrical stimulation therapy in improving arm function after stroke: a systematic review and a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to investigate the effectiveness of electrical stimulation in arm function recovery after stroke.

METHODS

Data were obtained from the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Scopus databases from their inception until 12 January 2019. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting the effects of electrical stimulation on the recovery of arm function after stroke were selected.

RESULTS

Forty-eight RCTs with a total of 1712 patients were included in the analysis. The body function assessment, Upper-Extremity Fugl-Meyer Assessment, indicated more favorable outcomes in the electrical stimulation group than in the placebo group immediately after treatment (23 RCTs (n = 794): standard mean difference (SMD) = 0.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.51-0.84) and at follow-up (12 RCTs (n = 391): SMD = 0.66, 95% CI = 0.35-0.97). The activity assessment, Action Research Arm Test, revealed superior outcomes in the electrical stimulation group than those in the placebo group immediately after treatment (10 RCTs (n = 411): SMD = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.39-1.02) and at follow-up (8 RCTs (n = 289): SMD = 0.93, 95% CI = 0.34-1.52). Other activity assessments, including Wolf Motor Function Test, Box and Block Test, and Motor Activity Log, also revealed superior outcomes in the electrical stimulation group than those in the placebo group. Comparisons between three types of electrical stimulation (sensory, cyclic, and electromyography-triggered electrical stimulation) groups revealed no significant differences in the body function and activity.

CONCLUSION

Electrical stimulation therapy can effectively improve the arm function in stroke patients.

Electrical Somatosensory Stimulation in Early Rehabilitation of Arm Paresis After Stroke: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Arm paresis is present in 48% to 77% of acute stroke patients. Complete functional recovery is reported in only 12% to 34%. Although the arm recovery is most pronounced during the first 4 weeks poststroke, few studies examined the effect of upper extremity interventions during this period.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effect of electrical somatosensory stimulation (ESS) delivered during early stroke rehabilitation on the recovery of arm functioning.

METHODS

A total of 102 patients with arm paresis were randomized to a high-dose or a low-dose ESS group within 7 days poststroke according to our sample size estimation. The high-dose group received 1-hour ESS to the paretic arm daily during hospitalization immediately followed by minimum 15-minute task-oriented arm training that was considered a component of the usual rehabilitation. The low-dose group received a placebo ESS followed by identical training. Primary outcome-Box and Block Test (BBT); secondary outcomes-Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA), grip strength, pinch strength, perceptual threshold of touch, pain, and modified Rankin Scale (mRS); all recorded at baseline, postintervention and at 6 months poststroke.

RESULTS

There were no differences between the high-dose and the low-dose groups for any outcome measures at any time points. Improvements ⩾ minimal clinically important difference were observed for FMA, hand grip strength, and mRS in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Providing the present ESS protocol prior to arm training was equally beneficial as arm training alone. These results are valid for patients with mild-to-moderate stroke and moderate arm impairments. We cannot exclude benefits in patients with other characteristics, in other time intervals poststroke or using a different ESS protocol.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02250365).

Self-directed therapy programmes for arm rehabilitation after stroke: a systematic review

AIM

To investigate the effectiveness of self-directed arm interventions in adult stroke survivors.

METHODS

A systematic review of Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, SCOPUS and IEEE Xplore up to February 2018 was carried out. Studies of stroke arm interventions were included where more than 50% of the time spent in therapy was initiated and carried out by the participant. Quality of the evidence was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool.

RESULTS

A total of 40 studies ( n = 1172 participants) were included (19 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 21 before-after studies). Studies were grouped according to no technology or the main additional technology used (no technology n = 5; interactive gaming n = 6; electrical stimulation n = 11; constraint-induced movement therapy n = 6; robotic and dynamic orthotic devices n = 8; mirror therapy n = 1; telerehabilitation n = 2; wearable devices n = 1). A beneficial effect on arm function was found for self-directed interventions using constraint-induced movement therapy ( n = 105; standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.39, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.00 to 0.78) and electrical stimulation ( n = 94; SMD 0.50, 95% CI 0.08-0.91). Constraint-induced movement therapy and therapy programmes without technology improved independence in activities of daily living. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated arm function benefit for patients >12 months poststroke ( n = 145; SMD 0.52, 95% CI 0.21-0.82) but not at 0-3, 3-6 or 6-12 months.

CONCLUSION

Self-directed interventions can enhance arm recovery after stroke but the effect varies according to the approach used and timing. There were benefits identified from self-directed delivery of constraint-induced movement therapy, electrical stimulation and therapy programmes that increase practice without using additional technology.

The use of advanced medical technologies at home: a systematic review of the literature

Background

The number of medical technologies used in home settings has increased substantially over the last 10–15 years. In order to manage their use and to guarantee quality and safety, data on usage trends and practical experiences are important. This paper presents a literature review on types, trends and experiences with the use of advanced medical technologies at home.

Methods

The study focused on advanced medical technologies that are part of the technical nursing process and ‘hands on’ processes by nurses, excluding information technology such as domotica. The systematic review of literature was performed by searching the databases MEDLINE, Scopus and Cinahl. We included papers from 2000 to 2015 and selected articles containing empirical material.

Results

The review identified 87 relevant articles, 62% was published in the period 2011–2015. Of the included studies, 45% considered devices for respiratory support, 39% devices for dialysis and 29% devices for oxygen therapy. Most research has been conducted on the topic ‘user experiences’ (36%), mainly regarding patients or informal caregivers. Results show that nurses have a key role in supporting patients and family caregivers in the process of homecare with advanced medical technologies and in providing information for, and as a member of multi-disciplinary teams. However, relatively low numbers of articles were found studying nurses perspective.

Conclusions

Research on medical technologies used at home has increased considerably until 2015. Much is already known on topics, such as user experiences; safety, risks, incidents and complications; and design and technological development. We also identified a lack of research exploring the views of nurses with regard to medical technologies for homecare, such as user experiences of nurses with different technologies, training, instruction and education of nurses and human factors by nurses in risk management and patient safety.

Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation for Treatment of Muscle Impairment: Critical Review and Recommendations for Clinical Practice

Purpose: In response to requests from physiotherapists for guidance on optimal stimulation of muscle using neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES), a review, synthesis, and extraction of key data from the literature was undertaken by six Canadian physical therapy (PT) educators, clinicians, and researchers in the field of electrophysical agents. The objective was to identify commonly treated conditions for which there was a substantial body of literature from which to draw conclusions regarding the effectiveness of NMES. Included studies had to apply NMES with visible and tetanic muscle contractions. Method: Four electronic databases (CINAHL, Embase, PUBMED, and SCOPUS) were searched for relevant literature published between database inceptions until May 2015. Additional articles were identified from bibliographies of the systematic reviews and from personal collections. Results: The extracted data were synthesized using a consensus process among the authors to provide recommendations for optimal stimulation parameters and application techniques to address muscle impairments associated with the following conditions: stroke (upper or lower extremity; both acute and chronic), anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, patellofemoral pain syndrome, knee osteoarthritis, and total knee arthroplasty as well as critical illness and advanced disease states. Summaries of key details from each study incorporated into the review were also developed. The final sections of the article outline the recommended terminology for describing practice using electrical currents and provide tips for safe and effective clinical practice using NMES. Conclusion: This article provides physiotherapists with a resource to enable evidence-informed, effective use of NMES for PT practice.

Effects of somatosensory electrical stimulation on motor function and cortical oscillations

Background

Few patients recover full hand dexterity after an acquired brain injury such as stroke. Repetitive somatosensory electrical stimulation (SES) is a promising method to promote recovery of hand function. However, studies using SES have largely focused on gross motor function; it remains unclear if it can modulate distal hand functions such as finger individuation.

Objective

The specific goal of this study was to monitor the effects of SES on individuation as well as on cortical oscillations measured using EEG, with the additional goal of identifying neurophysiological biomarkers.

Methods

Eight participants with a history of acquired brain injury and distal upper limb motor impairments received a single two-hour session of SES using transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation. Pre- and post-intervention assessments consisted of the Action Research Arm Test (ARAT), finger fractionation, pinch force, and the modified Ashworth scale (MAS), along with resting-state EEG monitoring.

Results

SES was associated with significant improvements in ARAT, MAS and finger fractionation. Moreover, SES was associated with a decrease in low frequency (0.9-4 Hz delta) ipsilesional parietomotor EEG power. Interestingly, changes in ipsilesional motor theta (4.8–7.9 Hz) and alpha (8.8–11.7 Hz) power were significantly correlated with finger fractionation improvements when using a multivariate model.

Conclusions

We show the positive effects of SES on finger individuation and identify cortical oscillations that may be important electrophysiological biomarkers of individual responsiveness to SES. These biomarkers can be potential targets when customizing SES parameters to individuals with hand dexterity deficits. Trial registration: NCT03176550; retrospectively registered.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12984-017-0323-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Electrical somatosensory stimulation followed by motor training of the paretic upper limb in acute stroke: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

Upper limb paresis is one of the most frequent and persistent impairments following stroke. Only 12–34% of stroke patients achieve full recovery of upper limb functioning, which seems to be required to habitually use the affected arm in daily tasks. Although the recovery of upper limb functioning is most pronounced during the first 4 weeks post stroke, there are few studies investigating the effect of rehabilitation during this critical time window. The purpose of this trial is to determine the effect of electrical somatosensory stimulation (ESS) initiated in the acute stroke phase on the recovery of upper limb functioning in a nonselected sample of stroke patients.

Methods/design

A sample of 102 patients with upper limb paresis of varying degrees of severity is assigned to either the intervention or the control group using stratified random sampling. The intervention group receives ESS plus usual rehabilitation and the control group receives sham ESS plus usual rehabilitation. The intervention is applied as 1 h of ESS/sham ESS daily, followed by motor training of the affected upper limb. The ESS/sham ESS treatment is initiated within 7 days from stroke onset and it is delivered during hospitalization, but no longer than 4 weeks post stroke. The primary outcome is hand dexterity assessed by the Box and Block Test; secondary outcomes are the Fugl-Meyer Assessment, hand grip strength, pinch strength, perceptual threshold of touch, degree of pain, and modified Rankin Scale score. Outcome measurements are conducted at baseline, post intervention and at 6-month follow-up.

Discussion

Because of the wide inclusion criteria, we believe that the results can be generalized to the larger population of patients with a first-ever stroke who present with an upper limb paresis of varying severity. On the other hand, the sample size (n = 102) may preclude subgroup analyses in such a heterogeneous sample. The sham ESS treatment totals a mere 2% of the active ESS treatment delivered to the intervention group per ESS session, and we consider that this dose is too small to induce a treatment effect.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02250365. Registered on 18 September 2014.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-017-1815-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Nerve Stimulation Enhances Task-Oriented Training in Chronic, Severe Motor Deficit After Stroke

Background and Purpose—

A sensory-based intervention called peripheral nerve stimulation can enhance outcomes of motor training for stroke survivors with mild-to-moderate hemiparesis. Further research is needed to establish whether this paired intervention can have benefit in cases of severe impairment (almost no active movement).

Methods—

Subjects with chronic, severe poststroke hemiparesis (n=36) were randomized to receive 10 daily sessions of either active or sham stimulation (2 hours) immediately preceding intensive task-oriented training (4 hours). Upper extremity movement function was assessed using Fugl–Meyer Assessment (primary outcome measure), Wolf Motor Function Test, and Action Research Arm Test at baseline, immediately post intervention and at 1-month follow-up.

Results—

Statistically significant difference between groups favored the active stimulation group on Fugl–Meyer at postintervention (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1–6.9; P =0.008) and 1-month follow-up (95% CI, 0.6–8.3; P =0.025), Wolf Motor Function Test at postintervention (95% CI, −0.21 to −0.02; P =0.020), and Action Research Arm Test at postintervention (95% CI, 0.8–7.3; P =0.015) and 1-month follow-up (95% CI, 0.6–8.4; P =0.025). Only the active stimulation condition was associated with (1) statistically significant within-group benefit on all outcomes at 1-month follow-up and (2) improvement exceeding minimal detectable change, as well as minimal clinically significant difference, on ≥1 outcomes at ≥1 time points after intervention.

Conclusions—

After stroke, active peripheral nerve stimulation paired with intensive task–oriented training can effect significant improvement in severely impaired upper extremity movement function. Further confirmatory studies that consider a larger group, as well as longer follow-up, are needed.

Clinical Trial Registration—

URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT02633215.

Application of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Neurorehabilitation: The Modulatory Effect of Sleep

The relationship between sleep disorders and neurological disorders is often reciprocal, such that sleep disorders are worsened by neurological symptoms and that neurological disorders are aggravated by poor sleep. Animal and human studies further suggest that sleep disruption not only worsens single neurological symptoms but may also lead to long-term negative outcomes. This suggests that sleep may play a fundamental role in neurorehabilitation and recovery. We further propose that sleep may not only alter the efficacy of behavioral treatments but also plasticity-enhancing adjunctive neurostimulation methods, such as transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS). At present, sleep receives little attention in the fields of neurorehabilitation and neurostimulation. In this review, we draw together the strands of evidence from both fields of research to highlight the proposition that sleep is an important parameter to consider in the application of tDCS as a primary or adjunct rehabilitation intervention.

Is the Frequency in Somatosensory Electrical Stimulation the Key Parameter in Modulating the Corticospinal Excitability of Healthy Volunteers and Stroke Patients with Spasticity?

Somatosensory electrical stimulation (SES) has been proposed as an approach to treat patients with sensory-motor impairment such as spasticity. However, there is still no consensus regarding which would be the adequate SES parameters to treat those deficits. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of applying SES over the forearm muscles at four different frequencies of stimulation (3, 30, 150, and 300 Hz) and in two intervals of time (5′ and 30′) by means of transcranial magnetic stimulation and Hoffmann's reflex (H-reflex) in healthy volunteers (Experiments  I and II). A group of stroke patients (Experiment  III) was also preliminary evaluated to ascertain SES effects at a low frequency (3 Hz) applied for 30′ over the forearm spastic flexors muscles by measuring the wrist joint passive torque. Motor evoked potentials and the H-reflex were collected from different forearm and hand muscles immediately before and after SES and up to 5′ (Experiment  I) and 10′ (Experiments  I and II) later. None of the investigated frequencies of SES was able to operate as a key in switching modulatory effects in the central nervous system of healthy volunteers and stroke patients with spasticity.

Upper Limb Immobilisation: A Neural Plasticity Model with Relevance to Poststroke Motor Rehabilitation

Advances in our understanding of the neural plasticity that occurs after hemiparetic stroke have contributed to the formulation of theories of poststroke motor recovery. These theories, in turn, have underpinned contemporary motor rehabilitation strategies for treating motor deficits after stroke, such as upper limb hemiparesis. However, a relative drawback has been that, in general, these strategies are most compatible with the recovery profiles of relatively high-functioning stroke survivors and therefore do not easily translate into benefit to those individuals sustaining low-functioning upper limb hemiparesis, who otherwise have poorer residual function. For these individuals, alternative motor rehabilitation strategies are currently needed. In this paper, we will review upper limb immobilisation studies that have been conducted with healthy adult humans and animals. Then, we will discuss how the findings from these studies could inspire the creation of a neural plasticity model that is likely to be of particular relevance to the context of motor rehabilitation after stroke. For instance, as will be elaborated, such model could contribute to the development of alternative motor rehabilitation strategies for treating poststroke upper limb hemiparesis. The implications of the findings from those immobilisation studies for contemporary motor rehabilitation strategies will also be discussed and perspectives for future research in this arena will be provided as well.

Improving arm function in chronic stroke: a pilot study of sensory amplitude electrical stimulation via glove electrode during task-specific training

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effects of sensory amplitude electrical stimulation (SES) delivered by glove electrode during task-specific exercise on arm movement, function, and sensation in chronic stroke.

METHODS

The design was an intervention pilot study, pre-test, post-test, follow-up design. The settings used were a university research laboratory and home-based intervention. Participants comprised of 11 individuals with chronic stroke (7.2 ± 4.1 years post onset) and moderate arm paresis, 10.82/20 ± 2.27 on the Stroke Rehabilitation Assessment of Movement (STREAM) - Arm Subscale. Participants were seven males and four females (mean age: 59 years). Participants were recruited from university-based database. Intervention- Participants engaged in task-specific training at home for 30 min, twice daily, for 5 weeks, while receiving SES via glove electrode. Participants received supervised task practice at least twice during intervention period for 1 hour. Main outcome measures- Jebsen-Taylor Hand Function Test (JTHFT), STREAM - Arm Subscale, Motor Activity Log-14 (MAL-14) - Amount and Quality Subscales, and Nottingham Stereognosis Assessment (NSA).

RESULTS

Significant changes were found in group mean pre- and post-test comparisons on the NSA (P = 0.042), MAL amount subscale (P = 0.047), and JTHFT (with writing item 29 excluded) (P = 0.003) and in pre-test to follow-up comparisons on NSA (P = 0.027) and JTHFT (writing item excluded) (P = 0.009). There was no significant change on the STREAM (P = 1.0). Individuals with a greater baseline motor capacity determined by STREAM scores (P = 0.048) and more recent stroke (P = 0.014) had significantly greater improvements.

CONCLUSION

Combining task-specific training with glove-based SES in chronic stroke resulted in changes in arm sensation and function that were maintained at 3-month follow-up.

The Effect of Combined Somatosensory Stimulation and Task-Specific Training on Upper Limb Function in Chronic Stroke

Background. Somatosensory stimulation (SS) is a potential adjuvant to stroke rehabilitation, but the effect on function needs further investigation. Objective. To explore the effect of combining SS with task-specific training (TST) on upper limb function and arm use in chronic stroke survivors and determine underlying mechanisms. Methods. In this double-blinded randomized controlled trial (ISRCTN 05542931), 33 patients (mean 37.7 months poststroke) were block randomized to 2 groups: active or sham SS. They received 12 sessions of 2 hours of SS (active or sham) to all 3 upper limb nerves immediately before 30 minutes of TST. The primary outcome was the Action Research Arm Test (ARAT) score. Secondary outcomes were time to perform the ARAT, Fugl-Meyer Assessment score (FM), Motor Activity Log (MAL), and Goal Attainment Scale (GAS). Underlying mechanisms were explored using transcranial magnetic stimulation stimulus–response curves and intracortical inhibition. Outcomes were assessed at baseline, immediately following the intervention (mean 2 days), and 3 and 6 months (mean 96 and 190 days) after the intervention. Results. The active group (n = 16) demonstrated greater improvement in ARAT score and time immediately postintervention (between-group difference; P < .05), but not at 3- or 6-month follow-ups ( P > .2). Within-group improvements were seen for both groups for ARAT and GAS, but for the active group only for FM and MAL ( P < .05). Corticospinal excitability did not change. Conclusions. Long-lasting improvements in upper limb function were observed following TST. Additional benefit of SS was seen immediately post treatment, but did not persist and the underlying mechanisms remain unclear.