Sensory Profile of Children and Adolescents with Autism Spectrum Disorder and Tip-Toe Behavior: Results of an Observational Pilot Study

Atypical sensory processing is frequently reported in persons with autism spectrum disorders (ASD), and it is one of the described diagnostic criteria for ASD. There is also mounting literature supporting the presence of motor impairments in individuals with ASD. Among these motor signs, tip-toe behavior (TTB) is a possible clinical finding, but its etiology is not clearly understood. It is suggested that TTB in ASD could be a sign of a sensory modulation impairment, but evidence is lacking and controversial. The main aim of this pilot study is to explore sensory features in a sample (4 females; 28 males) of children and adolescents with ASD (age range: 7–18). All participants also presented Intellectual Disability. Participants were divided in two groups, matched for age and gender, on the basis of the presence or absence of TTB (16 ASD TTB group vs. 16 ASD NO-TTB group) and then evaluated by using the Short Sensory Profile. We found that both ASD groups tend to significantly present sensory-related behavioral symptoms, but ASD TTB individuals more frequently showed the specific pattern of “under responsive/seeks sensation” than ASD NO-TTB individuals. These preliminary findings support that sensory-motor features might be taken into consideration when rehabilitation for TTB in children and adolescents with ASD is necessary

Combined Motor and Cognitive Rehabilitation: The Impact on Motor Performance in Patients with Mild Cognitive Impairment. Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Mild cognitive impairment (MCI), a neurodegenerative disease leading to Alzheimer’s disease or dementia, is often associated with physical complaints. Combined physical and cognitive training (PCT) has been investigated to see the effects on cognitive function, but its impact on motor functions and activities of daily living has not been explored yet. The combination of physical and cognitive training may be a valuable non-pharmacological intervention that could preserve motor function and quality of life (QoL). We aimed, therefore, to analyze if combined PCT is effective at improving motor performance in patients with an MCI. A systematic electronic literature search and a meta-analysis were conducted. The following criteria were compulsory for inclusion in the study: (1) randomized controlled trial design; (2) combined PCT compared to motor training alone or no intervention; (3) motor outcomes as a study’s end point. Nine articles met the inclusion criteria. Results showed that PCT significantly enhances balance compared to motor training alone (SMD 0.56; 95% CI 0.07 to 1.06; I2 = 59%; 160 participants), whereas a significant improvement was found for mobility in the PCT group when compared to no intervention (MD −1.80; 95% CI −2.70 to −0.90; I2 = 0%; 81 participants). However, there is no evidence that people with MCI experience an increase in gait speed and QoL at the end of their practice sessions. Further investigation with larger samples and a longer period of monitoring after intervention should be undertaken

Rehabilitation, exercise, and related non-pharmacological interventions for chemotherapy-induced peripheral neurotoxicity: systematic review and evidence-based recommendations

: Pharmacological strategies for chemotherapy-induced peripheral neurotoxicity (CIPN) are very limited. We systematically reviewed data on rehabilitation, exercise, physical therapy, and other physical non-pharmacological interventions and offered evidence-based recommendations for the prevention and treatment of CIPN. A literature search using PubMed, Web of Science and CINAHL was conducted from database inception until May 31st, 2021. 2791 records were title-abstract screened, 71 papers were full-text screened, 41 studies were included, 21 on prevention and 20 on treatment of CIPN. Treatment type, cancer type, chemotherapy compounds were heterogeneous, sample size was small (median: N\u2009=\u200934) and intention-to-treat analysis was lacking in 26/41 reports. Because of the methodological issues of included studies, the reviewed evidence should be considered as preliminary. Exercise, endurance, strength, balance, and sensorimotor training have been studied in low-to-moderate quality studies, while the evidence for other treatments is preliminary/inconclusive. We offer recommendation for the design of future trials on CIPN

Robot-assisted gait training in patients with Parkinson's disease: Implications for clinical practice. A systematic review

none36Background: Gait impairments are common disabling symptoms of Parkinson's disease (PD). Among the approaches for gait rehabilitation, interest in robotic devices has grown in recent years. However, the effectiveness compared to other interventions, the optimum amount of training, the type of device, and which patients might benefit most remains unclear. Objective: To conduct a systematic review about the effects on gait of robot-assisted gait training (RAGT) in PD patients and to provide advice for clinical practice. Methods: A search was performed on PubMed, Scopus, PEDro, Cochrane library,Web of science, and guideline databases,following PRISMA guidelines.We included English articles if they used a robotic system with details about the intervention, the parameters, and the outcome measures. We evaluated the level and quality of evidence. Results: We included twenty papers out of 230 results: two systematic reviews, 9 randomized controlled trials, 4 uncontrolled studies, and 5 descriptive reports. Nine studies used an exoskeleton device and the remainders end-effector robots, with large variability in terms of subjects' disease-related disability. Conclusions: RAGT showed benefits on gait and no adverse events were recorded. However, it does not seem superior to other interventions, except in patients with more severe symptoms and advanced disease.noneCarmignano, Simona Maria; Fundaro', Cira; Bonaiuti, Donatella; Calabro', Rocco Salvatore; Cassio, Anna; Mazzoli, Davide; Bizzarini, Emiliana; Campanini, Isabella; Cerulli, Simona; Chisari, Carmelo; Colombo, Valentina; Dalise, Stefania; Gazzotti, Valeria; Mazzoleni, Daniele; Mazzucchelli, Miryam; Melegari, Corrado; Merlo, Andrea; Stampacchia, Giulia; Boldrini, Paolo; Mazzoleni, Stefano; Posteraro, Federico; Benanti, Paolo; Castelli, Enrico; Draicchio, Francesco; Falabella, Vincenzo; Galeri, Silvia; Gimigliano, Francesca; Grigioni, Mauro; Mazzon, Stefano; Molteni, Franco; Morone, Giovanni; Petrarca, Maurizio; Picelli, Alessandro; Senatore, Michele; Turchetti, Giuseppe; Andrenelli, ElisaCarmignano, Simona Maria; Fundaro', Cira; Bonaiuti, Donatella; Calabro', Rocco Salvatore; Cassio, Anna; Mazzoli, Davide; Bizzarini, Emiliana; Campanini, Isabella; Cerulli, Simona; Chisari, Carmelo; Colombo, Valentina; Dalise, Stefania; Gazzotti, Valeria; Mazzoleni, Daniele; Mazzucchelli, Miryam; Melegari, Corrado; Merlo, Andrea; Stampacchia, Giulia; Boldrini, Paolo; Mazzoleni, Stefano; Posteraro, Federico; Benanti, Paolo; Castelli, Enrico; Draicchio, Francesco; Falabella, Vincenzo; Galeri, Silvia; Gimigliano, Francesca; Grigioni, Mauro; Mazzon, Stefano; Molteni, Franco; Morone, Giovanni; Petrarca, Maurizio; Picelli, Alessandro; Senatore, Michele; Turchetti, Giuseppe; Andrenelli, Elis

What does evidence tell us about the use of gait robotic devices in patients with multiple sclerosis? A comprehensive systematic review on functional outcomes and clinical recommendations

INTRODUCTION: There is growing evidence on the efficacy of gait robotic rehabilitation in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS), but most of the studies have focused on gait parameters. Moreover, clear indications on the clinical use of robotics still lack. As part of the CICERONE Italian Consensus on Robotic Rehabilitation, the aim of this systematic review was to investigate the existing evidence concerning the role of lower limb robotic rehabilitation in improving functional recovery in patients with MS. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We searched for and systematically reviewed evidence-based studies on gait robotic rehabilitation in MS, between January 1st, 2010 and December 31st, 2020, in the following databases: Cochrane Library, PEDro, PubMed and Google Scholar. The study quality was assessed by the 16-item assessment of multiple systematic reviews 2 (AMSTAR 2) and the 10-item PEDro scale for the other research studies. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: After an accurate screening, only 17 papers were included in the review, and most of them (13 RCT) had a level II evidence. Most of the studies used the Lokomat as a grounded robotic device, two investigated the efficacy of end-effectors and two powered exoskeletons. Generally speaking, robotic treatment has beneficial effects on gait speed, endurance and balance with comparable outcomes to those of conventional treatments. However, in more severe patients (EDSS >6), robotics leads to better functional outcomes. Notably, after gait training with robotics (especially when coupled to virtual reality) MS patients also reach better non-motor outcomes, including spasticity, fatigue, pain, psychological well-being and quality of life. Unfortunately, no clinical indications emerge on the treatment protocols. CONCLUSIONS: The present comprehensive systematic review highlights the potential beneficial role on functional outcomes of the lower limb robotic devices in people with MS. Future studies are warranted to evaluate the role of robotics not only for walking and balance outcomes, but also for other gait-training-related benefits, to identify appropriate outcome measures related to a specific subgroup of MS subjects' disease severity

Robotic-assisted gait rehabilitation following stroke: a systematic review of current guidelines and practical clinical recommendations

INTRODUCTION: Stroke is the third leading cause of adult disability worldwide, and lower extremity motor impairment is one of the major determinants of long-term disability. Although robotic therapy is becoming more and more utilized in research protocols for lower limb stroke rehabilitation, the gap between research evidence and its use in clinical practice is still significant. The aim of this study was to determine the scope, quality, and consistency of guidelines for robotic lower limb rehabilitation after stroke, in order to provide clinical recommendations.EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We systematically reviewed stroke rehabilitation guideline recommendations between January 1, 2010 and October 31, 2020. We explored electronic databases (N.=4), guideline repositories and professional rehabilitation networks (N.=12). Two independent reviewers used the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument, and brief syntheses were used to evaluate and compare the different recommendations, considering only the most recent version.EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: From the 1219 papers screened, ten eligible guidelines were identified from seven different regions/countries. Four of the included guidelines focused on stroke management, the other six on stroke rehabilitation. Robotic rehabilitation is generally recommended to improve lower limb motor function, including gait and strength. Unfortunately, there is still no consensus about the timing, frequency, training session duration and the exact characteristics of subjects who could benefit from robotics.CONCLUSIONS: Our systematic review shows that the introduction of robotic rehabilitation in standard treatment protocols seems to be the future of stroke rehabilitation. However, robot assisted gait training (RAGT) for stroke needs to be improved with new solutions and in clinical practice guidelines, especially in terms of applicability

Evidence-based improvement of gait in post-stroke patients following robot-assisted training: A systematic review

Background: The recovery of walking after stroke is a priority goal for recovering autonomy. In the last years robotic systems employed for Robotic Assisted Gait Training (RAGT) were developed. However, literature and clinical practice did not offer standardized RAGT protocol or pattern of evaluation scales. Objective: This systematic review aimed to summarize the available evidence on the use of RAGT in post-stroke, following the CICERONE Consensus indications. Methods: The literature search was conducted on Pubmed, Cochrane library and PEDro, including studies with the following criteria: 1) adult post-stroke survivors with gait disability in acute/subacute/chronic phase; 2) RAGT as intervention; 3) any comparators; 4) outcome regarding impairment, activity, and participation; 5) both primary studies and reviews. Results: Sixty-one articles were selected. Data about characteristics of patients, level of disability, robotic devices used, RAGT protocols, outcome measures, and level of evidence were extracted. Conclusion: It is possible to identify robotic devices that are more suitable for specific phase disease and level of disability, but we identified significant variability in dose and protocols. RAGT as an add-on treatment seemed to be prevalent. Further studies are needed to investigate the outcomes achieved as a function of RAGT doses delivered