Home-based therapy programmes for upper limb functional recovery following stroke

Background: With an increased focus on home-based stroke services and the undertaking of programmes, targeted at upper limb recovery within clinical practice, a systematic review of home-based therapy programmes for individuals with upper limb impairment following stroke was required. Objectives: To determine the effects of home-based therapy programmes for upper limb recovery in patients with upper limb impairment following stroke. Search methods: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group's Specialised Trials Register (May 2011), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 2), MEDLINE (1950 to May 2011), EMBASE (1980 to May 2011), AMED (1985 to May 2011) and six additional databases. We also searched reference lists and trials registers. Selection criteria: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in adults after stroke, where the intervention was a home-based therapy programme targeted at the upper limb, compared with placebo, or no intervention or usual care. Primary outcomes were performance in activities of daily living (ADL) and functional movement of the upper limb. Secondary outcomes were performance in extended ADL and motor impairment of the arm. Data collection and analysis: Two review authors independently screened abstracts, extracted data and appraised trials. We undertook assessment of risk of bias in terms of method of randomisation and allocation concealment (selection bias), blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias), whether all the randomised patients were accounted for in the analysis (attrition bias) and the presence of selective outcome reporting. Main results: We included four studies with 166 participants. No studies compared the effects of home-based upper limb therapy programmes with placebo or no intervention. Three studies compared the effects of home-based upper limb therapy programmes with usual care. Primary outcomes: we found no statistically significant result for performance of ADL (mean difference (MD) 2.85; 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.43 to 7.14) or functional movement of the upper limb (MD 2.25; 95% CI -0.24 to 4.73)). Secondary outcomes: no statistically significant results for extended ADL (MD 0.83; 95% CI -0.51 to 2.17)) or upper limb motor impairment (MD 1.46; 95% CI -0.58 to 3.51). One study compared the effects of a home-based upper limb programme with the same upper limb programme based in hospital, measuring upper limb motor impairment only; we found no statistically significant difference between groups (MD 0.60; 95% CI -8.94 to 10.14). Authors' conclusions: There is insufficient good quality evidence to make recommendations about the relative effect of home-based therapy programmes compared with placebo, no intervention or usual care

Interventions for improving upper limb function after stroke

Background: Improving upper limb function is a core element of stroke rehabilitation needed to maximise patient outcomes and reduce disability. Evidence about effects of individual treatment techniques and modalities is synthesised within many reviews. For selection of effective rehabilitation treatment, the relative effectiveness of interventions must be known. However, a comprehensive overview of systematic reviews in this area is currently lacking. Objectives: To carry out a Cochrane overview by synthesising systematic reviews of interventions provided to improve upper limb function after stroke. Methods: Search methods: We comprehensively searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews; the Database of Reviews of Effects; and PROSPERO (an international prospective register of systematic reviews) (June 2013). We also contacted review authors in an effort to identify further relevant reviews. Selection criteria: We included Cochrane and non‐Cochrane reviews of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of patients with stroke comparing upper limb interventions with no treatment, usual care or alternative treatments. Our primary outcome of interest was upper limb function; secondary outcomes included motor impairment and performance of activities of daily living. When we identified overlapping reviews, we systematically identified the most up‐to‐date and comprehensive review and excluded reviews that overlapped with this. Data collection and analysis: Two overview authors independently applied the selection criteria, excluding reviews that were superseded by more up‐to‐date reviews including the same (or similar) studies. Two overview authors independently assessed the methodological quality of reviews (using a modified version of the AMSTAR tool) and extracted data. Quality of evidence within each comparison in each review was determined using objective criteria (based on numbers of participants, risk of bias, heterogeneity and review quality) to apply GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) levels of evidence. We resolved disagreements through discussion. We systematically tabulated the effects of interventions and used quality of evidence to determine implications for clinical practice and to make recommendations for future research. Main results: Our searches identified 1840 records, from which we included 40 completed reviews (19 Cochrane; 21 non‐Cochrane), covering 18 individual interventions and dose and setting of interventions. The 40 reviews contain 503 studies (18,078 participants). We extracted pooled data from 31 reviews related to 127 comparisons. We judged the quality of evidence to be high for 1/127 comparisons (transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) demonstrating no benefit for outcomes of activities of daily living (ADLs)); moderate for 49/127 comparisons (covering seven individual interventions) and low or very low for 77/127 comparisons. Moderate‐quality evidence showed a beneficial effect of constraint‐induced movement therapy (CIMT), mental practice, mirror therapy, interventions for sensory impairment, virtual reality and a relatively high dose of repetitive task practice, suggesting that these may be effective interventions; moderate‐quality evidence also indicated that unilateral arm training may be more effective than bilateral arm training. Information was insufficient to reveal the relative effectiveness of different interventions. Moderate‐quality evidence from subgroup analyses comparing greater and lesser doses of mental practice, repetitive task training and virtual reality demonstrates a beneficial effect for the group given the greater dose, although not for the group given the smaller dose; however tests for subgroup differences do not suggest a statistically significant difference between these groups. Future research related to dose is essential. Specific recommendations for future research are derived from current evidence. These recommendations include but are not limited to adequately powered, high‐quality RCTs to confirm the benefit of CIMT, mental practice, mirror therapy, virtual reality and a relatively high dose of repetitive task practice; high‐quality RCTs to explore the effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), tDCS, hands‐on therapy, music therapy, pharmacological interventions and interventions for sensory impairment; and up‐to‐date reviews related to biofeedback, Bobath therapy, electrical stimulation, reach‐to‐grasp exercise, repetitive task training, strength training and stretching and positioning. Authors' conclusions: Large numbers of overlapping reviews related to interventions to improve upper limb function following stroke have been identified, and this overview serves to signpost clinicians and policy makers toward relevant systematic reviews to support clinical decisions, providing one accessible, comprehensive document, which should support clinicians and policy makers in clinical decision making for stroke rehabilitation. Currently, no high‐quality evidence can be found for any interventions that are currently used as part of routine practice, and evidence is insufficient to enable comparison of the relative effectiveness of interventions. Effective collaboration is urgently needed to support large, robust RCTs of interventions currently used routinely within clinical practice. Evidence related to dose of interventions is particularly needed, as this information has widespread clinical and research implications

Rehabilitative devices for a top-down approach

In recent years, neurorehabilitation has moved from a "bottom-up" to a "top down" approach. This change has also involved the technological devices developed for motor and cognitive rehabilitation. It implies that during a task or during therapeutic exercises, new "top-down" approaches are being used to stimulate the brain in a more direct way to elicit plasticity-mediated motor re-learning. This is opposed to "Bottom up" approaches, which act at the physical level and attempt to bring about changes at the level of the central neural system. Areas covered: In the present unsystematic review, we present the most promising innovative technological devices that can effectively support rehabilitation based on a top-down approach, according to the most recent neuroscientific and neurocognitive findings. In particular, we explore if and how the use of new technological devices comprising serious exergames, virtual reality, robots, brain computer interfaces, rhythmic music and biofeedback devices might provide a top-down based approach. Expert commentary: Motor and cognitive systems are strongly harnessed in humans and thus cannot be separated in neurorehabilitation. Recently developed technologies in motor-cognitive rehabilitation might have a greater positive effect than conventional therapies

Magnetoencephalography in Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation

Magnetoencephalography (MEG) is a non-invasive neurophysiological technique used to study the cerebral cortex. Currently, MEG is mainly used clinically to localize epileptic foci and eloquent brain areas in order to avoid damage during neurosurgery. MEG might, however, also be of help in monitoring stroke recovery and rehabilitation. This review focuses on experimental use of MEG in neurorehabilitation. MEG has been employed to detect early modifications in neuroplasticity and connectivity, but there is insufficient evidence as to whether these methods are sensitive enough to be used as a clinical diagnostic test. MEG has also been exploited to derive the relationship between brain activity and movement kinematics for a motor-based brain-computer interface. In the current body of experimental research, MEG appears to be a powerful tool in neurorehabilitation, but it is necessary to produce new data to confirm its clinical utility

Effectiveness of upper limb functional electrical stimulation after stroke for the improvement of activities of daily living and motor function: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. (DOC 60 kb

Closed-loop stimulation for upper limb rehabilitation following spinal cord injury and stroke

PhD ThesisInnovation is required to improve upper limb rehabilitation for neurological conditions such as stroke and spinal cord injury (SCI). There is growing appreciation of the importance of neural plasticity in recovery, and how this can be facilitated by synchronous activity in peripheral neural circuits and central brain areas. However, despite increasing scientific evidence, technological solutions that exploit associative plasticity have not yet been widely evaluated in clinical practice. In this thesis, I report the development and initial evaluation of a novel device which enabled a reaching and grasping motion in the affected limb by combining assistive functional electrical stimulation (FES) with inferred voluntary brain activity. The device was designed to enable translation from laboratory-to-clinic by overcoming common practical barriers to translational research, such as adaptability and ease of use. The device was demonstrated to be usable by individuals with either chronic stroke or SCI, and received positive qualitative feedback. Some participants showed modest improvements on assessments of upper limb function following a short intervention period. A study with healthy able-bodied volunteers indicated that after using the device, corticospinal pathways to the antagonist (flexor) muscle may be facilitated, and this facilitation might be increased by adjusting the relative timing of stimulation and inferred brain activity. The device could also deliver alternative stimulation techniques, and an exploratory study into transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation (tSCS) was conducted with healthy able-bodied volunteers. It was found that tSCS may activate peripheral and spinal pathways within acceptable comfort levels, but the parameters used in this study did not to generate functional contractions. An unexpected oscillatory motor response provided insights into how tSCS acts upon the motor system. Prior to a large scale evaluation of clinical effectiveness, further research is required to: further develop a theoretical basis for the intervention; demonstrate the mechanisms of action; and to evaluate the efficacy of the device.Wellcome Trust, postgraduate research studentship (2015 to 2018) • EPSRC Preparing for GCRF Award (PI: Dr Andrew Jackson) - Low cost rehabilitation of hand function following stroke (2016 to 2017

Simultaneous bilaternal training for improving arm function after stroke

Background Simultaneous bilateral training, the completion of identical activities with both arms simultaneously, is one intervention to improve arm function and reduce impairment. Objectives To determine the effects of simultaneous bilateral training for improving arm function after stroke. Search strategy We searched the Cochrane Stroke Trials Register (last searched August 2009) and 10 electronic bibliographic databases including the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library Issue 3, 2009), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and AMED (August 2009). We also searched reference lists and trials registers. Selection criteria Randomised trials in adults after stroke, where the intervention was simultaneous bilateral training compared to placebo or no intervention, usual care or other upper limb (arm) interventions. Primary outcomes were performance in activities of daily living (ADL) and functional movement of the upper limb. Secondary outcomes were performance in extended activities of daily living and motor impairment of the arm. Data collection and analysis Two authors independently screened abstracts, extracted data and appraised trials. Assessment of methodological quality was undertaken for allocation concealment, blinding of outcome assessor, intention-to-treat, baseline similarity and loss to follow up. Main results We included 18 studies involving 549 relevant participants, of which 14 (421 participants) were included in the analysis (one within both comparisons). Four of the 14 studies compared the effects of bilateral training with usual care. Primary outcomes: results were not statistically significant for performance in ADL (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.25, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.14 to 0.63); functional movement of the arm (SMD -0.07, 95% CI -0.42 to 0.28) or hand (SMD -0.04, 95% CI -0.50 to 0.42). Secondary outcomes: no statistically significant results. Eleven of the 14 studies compared the effects of bilateral training with other specific upper limb (arm) interventions. Primary outcomes: no statistically significant results for performance of ADL (SMD -0.25, 95% CI -0.57 to 0.08); functional movement of the arm (SMD -0.20, 95% CI -0.49 to 0.09) or hand (SMD -0.21, 95% CI -0.51 to 0.09). Secondary outcomes: one study reported a statistically significant result in favour of another upper limb intervention for performance in extended ADL. No statistically significant differences were found for motor impairment outcomes. Authors' conclusions There is insufficient good quality evidence to make recommendations about the relative effect of simultaneous bilateral training compared to placebo, no intervention or usual care. We identified evidence that suggests that bilateral training may be no more (or less) effective than usual care or other upper limb interventions for performance in ADL, functional movement of the upper limb or motor impairment outcome

Brain-machine interfaces for rehabilitation in stroke: A review

BACKGROUND: Motor paralysis after stroke has devastating consequences for the patients, families and caregivers. Although therapies have improved in the recent years, traditional rehabilitation still fails in patients with severe paralysis. Brain-machine interfaces (BMI) have emerged as a promising tool to guide motor rehabilitation interventions as they can be applied to patients with no residual movement. OBJECTIVE: This paper reviews the efficiency of BMI technologies to facilitate neuroplasticity and motor recovery after stroke. METHODS: We provide an overview of the existing rehabilitation therapies for stroke, the rationale behind the use of BMIs for motor rehabilitation, the current state of the art and the results achieved so far with BMI-based interventions, as well as the future perspectives of neural-machine interfaces. RESULTS: Since the first pilot study by Buch and colleagues in 2008, several controlled clinical studies have been conducted, demonstrating the efficacy of BMIs to facilitate functional recovery in completely paralyzed stroke patients with noninvasive technologies such as the electroencephalogram (EEG). CONCLUSIONS: Despite encouraging results, motor rehabilitation based on BMIs is still in a preliminary stage, and further improvements are required to boost its efficacy. Invasive and hybrid approaches are promising and might set the stage for the next generation of stroke rehabilitation therapies.This study was funded by the Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung BMBF MOTORBIC (FKZ13GW0053)andAMORSA(FKZ16SV7754), the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG), the fortüne-Program of the University of Tübingen (2422-0-0 and 2452-0-0), and the Basque GovernmentScienceProgram(EXOTEK:KK2016/00083). NIL was supported by the Basque Government’s scholarship for predoctoral students

Concurrent impact of bilateral multiple joint functional electrical stimulation and treadmill walking on gait and spasticity in post-stroke survivors: a pilot study

Background: Stroke causes multi-joint gait deficits, so a major objective of post-stroke rehabilitation is to regain normal gait function. Design and Setting: A case series completed at a neuroscience institute. Aim: The aim of the study was to determine the concurrent impact of functional electrical stimulation (FES) during treadmill walking on gait speed, knee extensors spasticity and ankle plantar flexors spasticity in post-stroke survivors. Participants: Six post-stroke survivors with altered gait patterns and ankle plantar flexors spasticity (4=male; age 56.8 ± 4.8 years; Body Mass Index (BMI) 26.2 ±4.3; since onset of stroke: 30.8 ±10.4 months; side of hemiplegia [L/R]: 3:3) were recruited. Intervention: Nine treatment sessions using FES bilaterally while walking on a treadmill. Main Outcome Measures: Primary outcome measures included the Modified Modified Ashworth Scale (MMAS), Timed Up and Go test (TUG), 10-m walking test, gait speed, and Functional ambulation category (FAC). Secondary outcome measures included the Step Length Test (SLT), and active range of motion (ROM) of the affected ankle and the knee. Measurements were taken at baseline (T0), at the end of last treatment (T1), and one month after the final treatment session (T2). Results: The TUG, 10-m walking test, gait speed, FAC, active ROM, and SLT all significantly improved following treatment (