Robotic Arm Rehabilitation in Chronic Stroke Patients With Aphasia May Promote Speech and Language Recovery (but Effect Is Not Enhanced by Supplementary tDCS)

The Efficacity of the NeuroAssist Robotic System for Motor Rehabilitation of the Upper Limb-Promising Results from a Pilot Study

The research aimed to evaluate the efficacy of the NeuroAssist, a parallel robotic system comprised of three robotic modules equipped with human-robot interaction capabilities, an internal sensor system for torque monitoring, and an external sensor system for real-time patient monitoring for the motor rehabilitation of the shoulder, elbow, and wrist. The study enrolled 10 consecutive patients with right upper limb paresis caused by stroke, traumatic spinal cord disease, or multiple sclerosis admitted to the Neurology I Department of Cluj-Napoca Emergency County Hospital. The patients were evaluated clinically and electrophysiologically before (T1) and after the intervention (T2). The intervention consisted of five consecutive daily sessions of 30-45 min each of 30 passive repetitive movements performed with the robot. There were significant differences (Wilcoxon signed-rank test) between baseline and end-point clinical parameters, specifically for the Barthel Index (53.00 ± 37.72 vs. 60.50 ± 36.39, p = 0.016) and Activities of Daily Living Index (4.70 ± 3.43 vs. 5.50 ± 3.80, p = 0.038). The goniometric parameters improved: shoulder flexion (70.00 ± 56.61 vs. 80.00 ± 63.59, p = 0.026); wrist flexion/extension (34.00 ± 28.75 vs. 42.50 ± 33.7, p = 0.042)/(30.00 ± 22.97 vs. 41.00 ± 30.62, p = 0.042); ulnar deviation (23.50 ± 19.44 vs. 33.50 ± 24.15, p = 0.027); and radial deviation (17.50 ± 18.14 vs. 27.00 ± 24.85, p = 0.027). There was a difference in muscle activation of the extensor digitorum communis muscle (1.00 ± 0.94 vs. 1.40 ± 1.17, p = 0.046). The optimized and dependable NeuroAssist Robotic System improved shoulder and wrist range of motion and functional scores, regardless of the cause of the motor deficit. However, further investigations are necessary to establish its definite role in motor recovery.

Research Hotspots and Frontiers of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Stroke: A Bibliometric Analysis

Background: Over the past decade, many studies in the field of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in stroke have been published in scholarly journals. However, a scientometric analysis focusing on tDCS after stroke is still missing. The purpose of this study is to deliver a bibliometric analysis to investigate the global hotspots and frontiers in the domain of tDCS in stroke from 2012 to 2021. Methods: Articles and reviews related to tDCS in stroke were retrieved and obtained from the Web of Science core collection database from 2012 to 2021. Data visualization and analysis were conducted by using CiteSpace, VOSviewer, and Microsoft Excel 2019. Results: Finally, 371 publications were included in the scientometric analysis, including 288 articles and 83 reviews. The results showed that the number of publications per year increased from 15 to 68 in the last 10 years. Neurosciences was the main research hotspot category (n = 201). Frontiers in Human Neuroscience was the most published journal with 14 papers. The most productive author, institution, and country were Fregni F (n = 13), the League of European Research Universities (n = 37), and the United States of America (n = 98), respectively. A burstness analysis of keywords and the literature indicated that current studies in the field of tDCS in stroke focused on poststroke aphasia, tDCS combined with robotic therapy, and anatomical parameters. Conclusion: The research of tDCS in stroke is predicted to remain a research hotspot in the future. We recommend investigating the curative effect of other different tDCS closed-loop rehabilitation methods for different stroke dysfunctions. In conclusion, this bibliometric study presented the hotspots and trends of tDCS in stroke over the last decade, which may help researchers manage their further studies.

Associations between Upper Extremity Motor Function and Aphasia after Stroke: A Multicenter Cross-Sectional Study

METHODS

Patients with stroke were compared and correlated from overall and three periods (1-3 months, 4-6 months, and >6 months). Fugl-Meyer assessment for the upper extremity (FMA-UE) and action research and arm test (ARAT) were used to compare the UE motor status between patients with PSA and without PSA through a cross-sectional study among 435 patients. Then, the correlations between the evaluation scale scores of UE motor status and language function of patients with PSA were analyzed in various dimensions, and the language subfunction most closely related to UE motor function was analyzed by multiple linear regression analysis.

RESULTS

We found that the scores of FMA-UE and ARAT in patients with PSA were 14 points ((CI) 10 to 18, p < 0.001) and 11 points lower ((CI) 8 to 13, p < 0.001), respectively, than those without PSA. Their FMA-UE (r = 0.70, p < 0.001) and ARAT (r = 0.62, p < 0.001) scores were positively correlated with language function. Regression analysis demonstrated that spontaneous speech ability may account for UE motor function (R 2 = 0.51, p < 0.001; R 2 = 0.42, p < 0.001). Consistent results were also obtained from the analyses within the three time subgroups.

CONCLUSION

Stroke patients with PSA have worse UE motor performance. UE motor status and language function showed positive correlations, in which spontaneous speech ability significantly accounts for the associations.

Interaction Between Recovery of Motor and Language Abilities After Stroke

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the nature of the interaction between motor and language recovery in patients with motor impairment and aphasia following left hemispheric stroke and to investigate prognostic factors of best recovery, that is, the significant recovery of both functions simultaneously.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Specialized inpatient rehabilitation facility.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients (N=435) with left hemispheric stroke in the postacute phase with motor impairment and aphasia.

INTERVENTION

Not applicable.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Patients who reached the minimal clinically important difference in the motor-FIM (M-FIM) were classified as motor responders, patients who reached a significant change in Aachen Aphasia Test were classified as language responders, and patients who reached a simultaneous and significant improvement in both functions were classified as motor and language responders.

RESULTS

Of the sample 45% were motor responders, 58% were language responders, and 35% were motor and language responders. Responder groups showed lower motor impairment and less severe aphasia at admission and greater improvement in both functions at discharge compared with nonresponder groups. Premorbid autonomy, dysphagia, apraxia, and number of rehabilitative sessions were also significantly different between groups. A logistic regression model identified M-FIM, repetition abilities, and number of sessions of speech and language therapy as independent predictors of best response (ie, motor and language responders).

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides evidence about a possible interaction between motor and language recovery after stroke. The improvement in one function was never associated with deterioration in the other. The results actually suggest a synergic effect between the amelioration of the 2 functions, with an overall increased efficiency when the 2 recovery pathways are combined.

Robot-assisted therapy for arm recovery for stroke patients: state of the art and clinical implication

Introduction: Robot-assisted therapy is an emerging approach that performs highly repetitive, intensive, task oriented and quantifiable neuro-rehabilitation. In the last decades, it has been increasingly used in a wide range of neurological central nervous system conditions implying an upper limb paresis. Results from the studies are controversial, for the many types of robots and their features often not accompanied by specific clinical indications about the target functions, fundamental for the individualized neurorehabilitation program.Areas covered: This article reviews the state of the art and perspectives of robotics in post-stroke rehabilitation for upper limb recovery. Classifications and features of robots have been reported in accordance with technological and clinical contents, together with the definition of determinants specific for each patient, that could modify the efficacy of robotic treatments. The possibility of combining robotic intervention with other therapies has also been discussed.Expert commentary: The recent wide diffusion of robots in neurorehabilitation has generated a confusion due to the commingling of technical and clinical aspects not previously clarified. Our critical review provides a possible hypothesis about how to match a robot with subject's upper limb functional abilities, but also highlights the need of organizing a clinical consensus conference about the robotic therapy.

Poststroke Aphasia Rehabilitation: Why All Talk and No Action?

There is ample agreement in the scientific literature, across diverse areas of study, that suggests that language and movement are interrelated. In particular, it is widely held that the upper limb and hand play a key role in language use. Aphasia, a common, disabling language disorder frequently associated with stroke, requires new restorative methods. A combinatorial hand-arm-language paradigm that capitalizes on shared neural networks may therefore prove beneficial for aphasia recovery in stroke patients and requires further exploration.