Synergy effects of combined multichannel EMG-triggered electrical stimulation and mirror therapy in subacute stroke patients with severe or very severe arm/hand paresis

Mirror therapy combined with contralaterally controlled functional electrical stimulation for the upper limb motor function after stroke: a randomized controlled trial

PURPOSE

In this study, we investigated the effects of mirror therapy (MT) combined with contralaterally controlled functional electrical stimulation (CCFES) on upper limb motor function, activities of daily life, and corticospinal excitability in post-stroke patients.

METHODS

Sixty post-stroke patients were randomly divided into four groups: CCFES, MT, MT combined with CCFES, and control. All the patients underwent routine rehabilitation. Those in the MT, CCFES, MT combined with CCFES, and control groups received MT, CCFES, MT combined with CCFES, and routine rehabilitation alone, respectively. Upper limb motor function, activities of daily living, and corticospinal excitability were evaluated before and after a 3-week intervention period.

RESULTS

MT combined with CCFES demonstrated a significantly greater therapeutic effect on motor function of the paretic wrist than CCFES, MT, or routine rehabilitation alone. However, there was no significant difference in the overall motor function of the affected upper limb, activities of daily life, or corticospinal excitability between the MT combined with CCFES group and the other three groups.

CONCLUSION

MT combined with CCFES may be a potential adjuvant therapy to promote motor function in paretic wrist after stroke.

Effects of mirror therapy with electrical stimulation for upper limb recovery in people with stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To provide updated evidence about the effects of MT with ES for recovering upper extremities motor function in people with stroke.

METHODS

Systematic review and meta-analysis were completed. Methodological quality was assessed using the version 2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. The GRADE approach was employed to assess the certainty of evidence.

RESULTS

A total of 16 trials with 773 participants were included in this review. The results demonstrated that MT with ES was more effective than sham (standardized mean difference [SMD], 1.89 [1.52-2.26]) and ES alone (SMD, 0.42 [0.11-0.73]) with low quality of evidence, or MT alone (SMD, 0.47[0.04-0.89]) with low quality of evidence for improving upper extremity motor control assessed using Fugl-Meyer Assessment. MT with ES had significant improvement of (MD, 6.47 [1.92-11.01]) the upper extremity gross gripping function assessed using the Action Research Arm Test compared with MT alone with low quality of evidence. MT combined with ES was more effective than sham group (SMD, 1.17 [0.42-1.93) for improving the ability to perform activities of daily living with low quality of evidence assessed using Motor Activity Log.

CONCLUSION

MT with ES may be effective in improving upper limb motor recovery in people with stroke.

Attentional State-Dependent Peripheral Electrical Stimulation During Action Observation Enhances Cortical Activations in Stroke Patients

Brain-computer interface (BCI) is a promising technique that enables patients' interaction with computers or machines by analyzing specific brain signal patterns and provides patients with brain state-dependent feedback to assist in their rehabilitation. Action observation (AO) and peripheral electrical stimulation (PES) are conventional methods used to enhance rehabilitation outcomes by promoting neural plasticity. In this study, we assessed the effects of attentional state-dependent feedback in the combined application of BCI-AO with PES on sensorimotor cortical activation in patients after stroke. Our approach involved showing the participants a video with repetitive grasping actions under four different tasks. A mu band suppression (8-13 Hz) corresponding to each task was computed. A topographical representation showed that mu suppression of the dominant (healthy) and affected hemispheres (stroke) gradually became prominent during the tasks. There were significant differences in mu suppression in the affected motor and frontal cortices of the stroke patients. The involvement of both frontal and motor cortices became prominent in the BCI-AO+triggered PES task, in which feedback was given to the patients according to their attentive watching. Our findings suggest that synchronous stimulation according to patient attention is important for neurorehabilitation of stroke patients, which can be achieved with the combination of BCI-AO feedback with PES. BCI-AO feedback combined with PES could be effective in facilitating sensorimotor cortical activation in the affected hemispheres of stroke patients.

Brain-computer interface-based action observation combined with peripheral electrical stimulation enhances corticospinal excitability in healthy subjects and stroke patients

Objective.Action observation (AO) combined with brain-computer interface (BCI) technology enhances cortical activation. Peripheral electrical stimulation (PES) increases corticospinal excitability, thereby activating brain plasticity. To maximize motor recovery, we assessed the effects of BCI-AO combined with PES on corticospinal plasticity.Approach.Seventeen patients with chronic hemiplegic stroke and 17 healthy subjects were recruited. The participants watched a video of repetitive grasping actions with four different tasks for 15 min: (A) AO alone; (B) AO + PES; (C) BCI-AO + continuous PES; and (D) BCI-AO + triggered PES. PES was applied at the ulnar nerve of the wrist. The tasks were performed in a random order at least three days apart. We assessed the latency and amplitude of motor evoked potentials (MEPs). We examined changes in MEP parameters pre-and post-exercise across the four tasks in the first dorsal interosseous muscle of the dominant hand (healthy subjects) and affected hand (stroke patients).Main results.The decrease in MEP latency and increase in MEP amplitude after the four tasks were significant in both groups. The increase in MEP amplitude was sustained for 20 min after tasks B, C, and D in both groups. The increase in MEP amplitude was significant between tasks A vs. B, B vs. C, and C vs. D. The estimated mean difference in MEP amplitude post-exercise was the highest for A and D in both groups.Significance.The results indicate that BCI-AO combined with PES is superior to AO alone or AO + PES for facilitating corticospinal plasticity in both healthy subjects and patients with stroke. Furthermore, this study supports the idea that synchronized activation of cortical and peripheral networks can enhance neuroplasticity after stroke. We suggest that the BCI-AO paradigm and PES could provide a novel neurorehabilitation strategy for patients with stroke.

Upper Limb Stroke Rehabilitation Using Surface Electromyography: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Upper limb impairment is common after stroke, and many will not regain full upper limb function. Different technologies based on surface electromyography (sEMG) have been used in stroke rehabilitation, but there is no collated evidence on the different sEMG-driven interventions and their effect on upper limb function in people with stroke.

Aim

Synthesize existing evidence and perform a meta-analysis on the effect of different types of sEMG-driven interventions on upper limb function in people with stroke.

Methods

PubMed, SCOPUS, and PEDro databases were systematically searched for eligible randomized clinical trials that utilize sEMG-driven interventions to improve upper limb function assessed by Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA-UE) in stroke. The PEDro scale was used to evaluate the methodological quality and the risk of bias of the included studies. In addition, a meta-analysis utilizing a random effect model was performed for studies comparing sEMG interventions to non-sEMG interventions and for studies comparing different sEMG interventions protocols.

Results

Twenty-four studies comprising 808 participants were included in this review. The methodological quality was good to fair. The meta-analysis showed no differences in the total effect, assessed by total FMA-UE score, comparing sEMG interventions to non-sEMG interventions (14 studies, 509 participants, SMD 0.14, P 0.37, 95% CI –0.18 to 0.46, I² 55%). Similarly, no difference in the overall effect was found for the meta-analysis comparing different types of sEMG interventions (7 studies, 213 participants, SMD 0.42, P 0.23, 95% CI –0.34 to 1.18, I² 73%). Twenty out of the twenty-four studies, including participants with varying impairment levels at all stages of stroke recovery, reported statistically significant improvements in upper limb function at post-sEMG intervention compared to baseline.

Conclusion

This review and meta-analysis could not discern the effect of sEMG in comparison to a non-sEMG intervention or the most effective type of sEMG intervention for improving upper limb function in stroke populations. Current evidence suggests that sEMG is a promising tool to further improve functional recovery, but randomized clinical trials with larger sample sizes are needed to verify whether the effect on upper extremity function of a specific sEMG intervention is superior compared to other non-sEMG or other type of sEMG interventions.

Efficacy of Four-Channel Functional Electrical Stimulation on Moderate Arm Paresis in Subacute Stroke Patients—Results from a Randomized Controlled Trial

This preliminary randomized clinical trial explores the efficacy of task-oriented electromyography (EMG)-triggered multichannel functional electrical stimulation (EMG-MES) compared to single-channel cyclic neuromuscular electrical stimulation (cNMES) on regaining control of voluntary movements (CVM) and the ability to execute arm-hand-activities in subacute stroke patients with moderate arm paresis. Twelve ischemic stroke patients (Fugl-Meyer Assessment Arm Section (FMA-AS) score: 19–47) with comparable demographics were block-randomized to receive 15 sessions of cNMES or EMG-MES over three weeks additionally to a conventional neurorehabilitation program including task-oriented arm training. FMA-AS, Box-and-Block Test (BBT), and Stroke-Impact-Scale (SIS) were recorded at baseline and follow-up. All participants demonstrated significant improvement in FMA-AS and BBT. Participants treated with EMG-MES had a higher mean gain in FMA-AS than those treated with cNMES. In the SIS daily activities domain, both groups improved non-significantly; participants in the EMG-MES group had higher improvement in arm-hand use and stroke recovery. EMG-MES treatment demonstrated a higher gain of CVM and self-reported daily activities, arm-hand use, and stroke recovery compared to cNMES treatment of the wrist only. The protocol of this proof-of-concept study seems robust enough to be used in a larger trial to confirm these preliminary findings.

Synergistic Immediate Cortical Activation on Mirror Visual Feedback Combined With a Soft Robotic Bilateral Hand Rehabilitation System: A Functional Near Infrared Spectroscopy Study

Background

Mirror visual feedback (MVF) has been widely used in neurological rehabilitation. Due to the potential gain effect of the MVF combination therapy, the related mechanisms still need be further analyzed.

Methods

Our self-controlled study recruited 20 healthy subjects (age 22.150 ± 2.661 years) were asked to perform four different visual feedback tasks with simultaneous functional near infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) monitoring. The right hand of the subjects was set as the active hand (performing active movement), and the left hand was set as the observation hand (static or performing passive movement under soft robotic bilateral hand rehabilitation system). The four VF tasks were designed as RVF Task (real visual feedback task), MVF task (mirror visual feedback task), BRM task (bilateral robotic movement task), and MVF + BRM task (Mirror visual feedback combined with bilateral robotic movement task).

Results

The beta value of the right pre-motor cortex (PMC) of MVF task was significantly higher than the RVF task (RVF task: -0.015 ± 0.029, MVF task: 0.011 ± 0.033, P = 0.033). The beta value right primary sensorimotor cortex (SM1) in MVF + BRM task was significantly higher than MVF task (MVF task: 0.006 ± 0.040, MVF + BRM task: 0.037 ± 0.036, P = 0.016).

Conclusion

Our study used the synchronous fNIRS to compare the immediate hemodynamics cortical activation of four visual feedback tasks in healthy subjects. The results showed the synergistic gain effect on cortical activation from MVF combined with a soft robotic bilateral hand rehabilitation system for the first time, which could be used to guide the clinical application and the future studies.

Mirror therapy simultaneously combined with electrical stimulation for upper limb motor function recovery after stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the current evidence on the effectiveness of simultaneous combination of mirror therapy and electrical stimulation in the recovery of upper limb motor function after stroke, compared with conventional therapy, mirror therapy or electrical stimulation isolated.

DATA SOURCES

Articles published in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), Cochrane Central register of controlled trials and ScienceDirect up to July 2020.

REVIEW METHODS

The PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines were followed. Methodological quality was assessed using the PEDro tool. The RevMan 5.4 statistical software was used to obtain the meta-analysis, through the standardized mean difference and 95% confidence intervals (CI), and to evaluate the risk of bias. The GRADE approach was employed to assess the certainty of evidence.

RESULTS

Eight articles were included in this systematic review, seven were included in the meta-analysis. A total of 314 participants were analyzed. The overall quality of the articles included in this review was good. There was no overall significant mean difference on upper limb motor function after stroke using the Upper-Extremity Fugl-Meyer Assessment by 1.56 (95% CI = -2.08, 5.20; P = 0.40; moderate-certainty evidence) and the Box and Block Test results by 1.39 (95% CI = -2.14, 4.92; P = 0.44; high-certainty evidence). There was overall significant difference in the Action Research Arm Test by 3.54 (95% CI = 0.18, 6.90; P = 0.04; high-certainty evidence).

CONCLUSION

Direct scientific evidence about the effectiveness of the combined therapy of mirror therapy and electrical stimulation simultaneously for the improvement of the upper limb motor function after stroke is lacking. Further high-quality and well-designed research is needed.

Pragmatic Solutions for Stroke Recovery and Improved Quality of Life in Low- and Middle-Income Countries-A Systematic Review

Background: Given the limited healthcare resources in low and middle income countries (LMICs), effective rehabilitation strategies that can be realistically adopted in such settings are required. Objective: A systematic review of literature was conducted to identify pragmatic solutions and outcomes capable of enhancing stroke recovery and quality of life of stroke survivors for low- and middle- income countries. Methods: PubMed, HINARI, and Directory of Open Access Journals databases were searched for published Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) till November 2018. Only completed trials published in English with non-pharmacological interventions on adult stroke survivors were included in the review while published protocols, pilot studies and feasibility analysis of trials were excluded. Obtained data were synthesized thematically and descriptively analyzed. Results: One thousand nine hundred and ninety six studies were identified while 347 (65.22% high quality) RCTs were found to be eligible for the review. The most commonly assessed variables (and outcome measure utility) were activities of daily living [75.79% of the studies, with Barthel Index (37.02%)], motor function [66.57%; with Fugl Meyer scale (71.88%)], and gait [31.12%; with 6 min walk test (38.67%)]. Majority of the innovatively high technology interventions such as robot therapy (95.24%), virtual reality (94.44%), transcranial direct current stimulation (78.95%), transcranial magnetic stimulation (88.0%) and functional electrical stimulation (85.00%) were conducted in high income countries. Several traditional and low-cost interventions such as constraint-induced movement therapy (CIMT), resistant and aerobic exercises (R&AE), task oriented therapy (TOT), body weight supported treadmill training (BWSTT) were reported to significantly contribute to the recovery of motor function, activity, participation, and improvement of quality of life after stroke. Conclusion: Several pragmatic, in terms of affordability, accessibility and utility, stroke rehabilitation solutions, and outcome measures that can be used in resource-limited settings were found to be effective in facilitating and enhancing post-stroke recovery and quality of life.

Neurotechnology-aided interventions for upper limb motor rehabilitation in severe chronic stroke

Upper limb motor deficits in severe stroke survivors often remain unresolved over extended time periods. Novel neurotechnologies have the potential to significantly support upper limb motor restoration in severely impaired stroke individuals. Here, we review recent controlled clinical studies and reviews focusing on the mechanisms of action and effectiveness of single and combined technology-aided interventions for upper limb motor rehabilitation after stroke, including robotics, muscular electrical stimulation, brain stimulation and brain computer/machine interfaces. We aim at identifying possible guidance for the optimal use of these new technologies to enhance upper limb motor recovery especially in severe chronic stroke patients. We found that the current literature does not provide enough evidence to support strict guidelines, because of the variability of the procedures for each intervention and of the heterogeneity of the stroke population. The present results confirm that neurotechnology-aided upper limb rehabilitation is promising for severe chronic stroke patients, but the combination of interventions often lacks understanding of single intervention mechanisms of action, which may not reflect the summation of single intervention’s effectiveness. Stroke rehabilitation is a long and complex process, and one single intervention administrated in a short time interval cannot have a large impact for motor recovery, especially in severely impaired patients. To design personalized interventions combining or proposing different interventions in sequence, it is necessary to have an excellent understanding of the mechanisms determining the effectiveness of a single treatment in this heterogeneous population of stroke patients. We encourage the identification of objective biomarkers for stroke recovery for patients’ stratification and to tailor treatments. Furthermore, the advantage of longitudinal personalized trial designs compared to classical double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trials as the basis for precise personalized stroke rehabilitation medicine is discussed. Finally, we also promote the necessary conceptual change from ‘one-suits-all’ treatments within in-patient clinical rehabilitation set-ups towards personalized home-based treatment strategies, by adopting novel technologies merging rehabilitation and motor assistance, including implantable ones.

Synergistic Effect of Combined Mirror Therapy on Upper Extremity in Patients With Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: There is an increasing trend for researchers to combine mirror therapy with another rehabilitation therapy when treating the upper extremity of patients with stroke.

Objective: To evaluate the synergistic effect of combined mirror therapy (MT) on the upper extremity in patients with stroke and to judge efficacies of four combined mirror therapy subgroups [EMGBF group: electromyographic biofeedback (EMGBF) + MT; MG group: mesh glove (MG) + MT; AT group: acupuncture (AT) + MT; ES group: EMG-triggered electrical stimulation (ES) + MT].

Methods: CNKI, Wan Fang, VIP, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, PubMed, OVID LWW, and Cochrane were used. We searched these databases for randomized controlled trials published from January 2013 to August 2019, which presented results of combining mirror therapy with other rehabilitation therapies. Quality assessments were performed using the Cochrane Handbook criteria in order to accurately review interventions. The primary outcomes were measured by the Fugl–Meyer Assessment—upper extremity (FMA-UE).

Results: Ten trials, with a total of 444 patients whose upper limb functions were damaged after stroke, were included in the meta-analysis. Compared with the control group, a remarkable effect of combined mirror therapy [all: weight mean difference in random effects model (WMD): 8.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) 5.87, 10.26] on functional recovery of the upper limb was detected. However, a high value of heterogeneity (χ2 = 20.09, df = 9; I² = 55%) was found. The subgroup analysis (EMGBF group: WMD = 8.95, 95% CI 6.33, 11.58; ES group: WMD = 10.14, 95% CI: 5.67, 15.01) showed moderate improvement in functional recovery of the upper extremity in patients with stroke when mirror therapy was combined with conventional therapy. Furthermore, no difference in efficacy on upper extremity in patients with stroke was observed between the EMGBF group and the ES group.

Conclusion: Despite the heterogeneity, the results indicate that combining mirror therapy with another rehabilitation therapy on the upper extremity in patients with stroke is better than single rehabilitation therapy. However, more randomized controlled clinical trials and larger sample sizes are required for an in-depth meta-analysis.

Effectiveness of interventions to improve hand motor function in individuals with moderate to severe stroke: a systematic review protocol

INTRODUCTION

The human hand is extremely involved in our daily lives. However, the rehabilitation of hand function after stroke can be rather difficult due to the complexity of hand structure and function, as well as neural basis that supports hand function. Specifically, in individuals with moderate to severe impairment following a stroke, previous evidence for effective treatments that recover hand function in this population is limited, and thus has never been reviewed. With the progress of rehabilitation science and tool development, results from more and more clinical trials are now available, thereby justifying conducting a systematic review.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This systematic review protocol is consistent with the methodology recommended by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols and the Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Electronic searches will be carried out in the PubMed, CINAHL, Physiotherapy Evidence Database and Cochrane Library databases, along with manual searches in the reference lists from included studies and published systematic reviews. The date range parameters used in searching all databases is between January 1999 and January 2019. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in English, with the primary outcome focusing on hand motor function, will be included. Two reviewers will screen all retrieved titles, abstracts and full texts, perform the evaluation of the risk bias and extract all data independently. The risk of bias of the included RCTs will be evaluated by the Cochrane Collaboration's tool. A qualitative synthesis will be provided in text and table, to summarise the main results of the selected publications. A meta-analysis will be considered if there is sufficient homogeneity across outcomes. The quality of the included publications will be evaluated by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation system from the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

No ethical approval is needed, and the results of this review will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42019128285.

Mirror therapy for improving motor function after stroke

BACKGROUND

Mirror therapy is used to improve motor function after stroke. During mirror therapy, a mirror is placed in the person's midsagittal plane, thus reflecting movements of the non-paretic side as if it were the affected side.

OBJECTIVES

To summarise the effectiveness of mirror therapy compared with no treatment, placebo or sham therapy, or other treatments for improving motor function and motor impairment after stroke. We also aimed to assess the effects of mirror therapy on activities of daily living, pain, and visuospatial neglect.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group's Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, AMED, PsycINFO and PEDro (last searched 16 August 2017). We also handsearched relevant conference proceedings, trials and research registers, checked reference lists, and contacted trialists, researchers and experts in our field of study.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and randomised cross-over trials comparing mirror therapy with any control intervention for people after stroke.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected trials based on the inclusion criteria, documented the methodological quality, assessed risks of bias in the included studies, and extracted data. We assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach. We analysed the results as standardised mean differences (SMDs) or mean differences (MDs) for continuous variables, and as odds ratios (ORs) for dichotomous variables.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 62 studies with a total of 1982 participants that compared mirror therapy with other interventions. Of these, 57 were randomised controlled trials and five randomised cross-over trials. Participants had a mean age of 59 years (30 to 73 years). Mirror therapy was provided three to seven times a week, between 15 and 60 minutes for each session for two to eight weeks (on average five times a week, 30 minutes a session for four weeks).When compared with all other interventions, we found moderate-quality evidence that mirror therapy has a significant positive effect on motor function (SMD 0.47, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.67; 1173 participants; 36 studies) and motor impairment (SMD 0.49, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.66; 1292 participants; 39 studies). However, effects on motor function are influenced by the type of control intervention. Additionally, based on moderate-quality evidence, mirror therapy may improve activities of daily living (SMD 0.48, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.65; 622 participants; 19 studies). We found low-quality evidence for a significant positive effect on pain (SMD -0.89, 95% CI -1.67 to -0.11; 248 participants; 6 studies) and no clear effect for improving visuospatial neglect (SMD 1.06, 95% CI -0.10 to 2.23; 175 participants; 5 studies). No adverse effects were reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The results indicate evidence for the effectiveness of mirror therapy for improving upper extremity motor function, motor impairment, activities of daily living, and pain, at least as an adjunct to conventional rehabilitation for people after stroke. Major limitations are small sample sizes and lack of reporting of methodological details, resulting in uncertain evidence quality.