[Hand robotic devices in neurorehabilitation: A systematic review on the feasibility and effectiveness of stroke rehabilitation]

Robot-assisted therapy is a relatively new intervention, increasingly used in the rehabilitation treatment of stroke patients. It allows to increase the number of repetitions in the performance of specific tasks movements. For this review, a search was carried out between August and October 2021 in the PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane, PEDro and OTseeker databases, selecting a total of six randomized controlled trials where robot-assisted hand therapy was used in stroke rehabilitation. Studies agree that robot-assisted hand therapy has benefits in all phases of stroke rehabilitation that translate into motor and functional improvements of the upper limb and improvements in hemispatial neglect.

Robot-assisted therapy for upper-limb rehabilitation in subacute stroke patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Stroke survivors often experience upper-limb motor deficits and achieve limited motor recovery within six months after the onset of stroke. We aimed to systematically review the effects of robot-assisted therapy (RT) in comparison to usual care on the functional and health outcomes of subacute stroke survivors.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2019 were identified from six electronic databases. Pooled estimates of standardized mean differences for five outcomes, including motor control (primary outcome), functional independence, upper extremity performance, muscle tone, and quality of life were derived by random effects meta-analyses. Assessments of risk of bias in the included RCTs and the quality of evidence for every individual outcomes were conducted following the guidelines of the Cochrane Collaboration.

RESULTS

Eleven RCTs involving 493 participants were included for review. At post-treatment, the effects of RT when compared to usual care on motor control, functional independence, upper extremity performance, muscle tone, and quality of life were nonsignificant (all ps ranged .16 to .86). The quality of this evidence was generally rated as low-to-moderate. Less than three RCTs assessed the treatment effects beyond post-treatment and the results remained nonsignificant.

CONCLUSION

Robot-assisted therapy produced benefits similar, but not significantly superior, to those from usual care for improving functioning and disability in patients diagnosed with stroke within six months. Apart from using head-to-head comparison to determine the effects of RT in subacute stroke survivors, future studies may explore the possibility of conducting noninferiority or equivalence trials, given that the less labor-intensive RT may offer important advantages over currently available standard care, in terms of improved convenience, better adherence, and lower manpower cost.

Effectiveness of Upper Limb Wearable Technology for Improving Activity and Participation in Adult Stroke Survivors: Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

With advances in technology, the adoption of wearable devices has become a viable adjunct in poststroke rehabilitation. Upper limb (UL) impairment affects up to 77% of stroke survivors impacting on their ability to carry out everyday activities. However, despite an increase in research exploring these devices for UL rehabilitation, little is known of their effectiveness.

OBJECTIVE

This review aimed to assess the effectiveness of UL wearable technology for improving activity and participation in adult stroke survivors.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and randomized comparable trials of UL wearable technology for poststroke rehabilitation were included. Primary outcome measures were validated measures of activity and participation as defined by the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health. Databases searched were MEDLINE, Web of Science (Core collection), CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool was used to assess the methodological quality of the RCTs and the Downs and Black Instrument for the quality of non RCTs.

RESULTS

In the review, we included 11 studies with collectively 354 participants at baseline and 323 participants at final follow-up including control groups and participants poststroke. Participants' stroke type and severity varied. Only 1 study found significant between-group differences for systems functioning and activity (P≤.02). The 11 included studies in this review had small sample sizes ranging from 5 to 99 participants at an average (mean) age of 57 years.

CONCLUSIONS

This review has highlighted a number of reasons for insignificant findings in this area including low sample sizes and the appropriateness of the methodology for complex interventions. However, technology has the potential to measure outcomes, provide feedback, and engage users outside of clinical sessions. This could provide a platform for motivating stroke survivors to carry out more rehabilitation in the absence of a therapist, which could maximize recovery.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42017057715; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=57715.

Neuromuscular electrical stimulation-promoted plasticity of the human brain

The application of neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) to paretic limbs has demonstrated utility for motor rehabilitation following brain injury. When NMES is delivered to a mixed peripheral nerve, typically both efferent and afferent fibres are recruited. Muscle contractions brought about by the excitation of motor neurons are often used to compensate for disability by assisting actions such as the formation of hand aperture, or by preventing others including foot drop. In this context, exogenous stimulation provides a direct substitute for endogenous neural drive. The goal of the present narrative review is to describe the means through which NMES may also promote sustained adaptations within central motor pathways, leading ultimately to increases in (intrinsic) functional capacity. There is an obvious practical motivation, in that detailed knowledge concerning the mechanisms of adaptation has the potential to inform neurorehabilitation practice. In addition, responses to NMES provide a means of studying CNS plasticity at a systems level in humans. We summarize the fundamental aspects of NMES, focusing on the forms that are employed most commonly in clinical and experimental practice. Specific attention is devoted to adjuvant techniques that further promote adaptive responses to NMES thereby offering the prospect of increased therapeutic potential. The emergent theme is that an association with centrally initiated neural activity, whether this is generated in the context of NMES triggered by efferent drive or via indirect methods such as mental imagery, may in some circumstances promote the physiological changes that can be induced through peripheral electrical stimulation.

Introducing robotic upper limb training into routine clinical practice for stroke survivors: Perceptions of occupational therapists and physiotherapists

INTRODUCTION

Robot-assisted therapy for the upper limb (RT-UL) is an emerging form of intervention for stroke survivors with upper limb deficits. However, there is limited knowledge regarding therapists' perceptions of RT-UL and the factors influencing the implementation of RT-UL into the clinical setting. This is important when considering that therapists in Australia are primarily responsible for the prescription of RT-UL in daily practice. This study aimed to explore occupational therapists' and physiotherapists' perceptions of RT-UL and the perceived barriers and enablers influencing implementation.

METHODS

Two discipline-specific focus groups were conducted involving occupational therapists (n = 6) and physiotherapists (n = 6). Participants were members of the same multidisciplinary team working in an Australian public health rehabilitation facility where RT-UL (i.e. InMotion2) was being introduced for the first time. Focus groups explored therapist perceptions of the new RT-UL as well as perceived barriers and enablers to implementation. Focus groups were recorded, transcribed and deductively analysed using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF).

RESULTS

Out of the 14 domains of the TDF, 7 were raised by participants during the focus groups: environmental context and resources, beliefs about consequences, optimism, knowledge, skills, social influences, and social and professional role and identity. Therapists' expressed their optimism towards the introduction of RT-UL but believed successful implementation would be primarily dependent on the availability of clinical leadership, training and a suitable client mix.

CONCLUSION

Therapists perceived that RT-UL would provide opportunity for increased upper limb practice particularly for patients with severe upper limb impairment. To facilitate implementation, support of RT-UL should come from both management and clinical leaders and training include RT-UL efficacy, device functionality and patient suitability. The availability of a single RT-UL device in a workplace may create unique interdisciplinary and logistical challenges.

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.

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

QUESTION

In adults undergoing rehabilitation after stroke, does 1 hour of additional active repetitive reaching per day prevent or reduce upper limb contracture?

DESIGN

Multi-centre, randomised controlled trial with concealed allocation, assessor blinding, and intention-to-treat analysis.

PARTICIPANTS

Fifty adults undergoing rehabilitation after stroke who were unable to actively extend the affected wrist past neutral or were unable to flex the affected shoulder to 90 deg.

SETTING

Three inpatient rehabilitation units in Australia.

INTERVENTION

Both groups received usual upper limb therapy 5 days a week for 5 weeks. In addition, the experimental group received up to 1 hour a day of active, intensive, repetitive upper limb training using the SMART Arm device 5 days a week for 5 weeks.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Measures were collected at baseline (Week 0), after intervention (Week 5) and at follow-up (Week 7). The primary outcomes were passive range of wrist extension, elbow extension, and shoulder flexion at Week 5. The secondary outcomes were: the three primary outcomes measured at Week 7; passive range of shoulder external rotation; arm function; and pain at rest, on movement and during sleep measured at Weeks 5 and 7.

RESULTS

Following an average of 2310 reaching repetitions, the mean effect at Week 5 on passive range of wrist extension was 1 deg (95% CI -6 to 8), elbow extension -6 deg (95% CI -12 to -1), and shoulder flexion 5 deg (95% CI -8 to 17). There were no statistically significant or clinically important effects of the intervention on any secondary outcomes.

CONCLUSION

In adults who are already receiving task-specific motor training for upper limb rehabilitation following stroke, 5 weeks of up to 1 hour of additional daily active repetitive motor training using the SMART Arm device did not prevent or reduce contracture in upper limb muscles.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ACTRN12614001162606.