Effectiveness of Mechanical Horse-Riding Simulator-based Interventions in Patients with Cerebral Palsy—A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Mechanical horse-riding simulator (HRS) exercises are a type of therapy based on the use of robotic or mechanical devices that produces movement similar to a real horse with the aim of simulating hippotherapy. This review analyses the effectiveness of HRS therapies in patients with cerebral palsy (CP). Methods: A systematic review and a meta-analysis were carried out by searching studies in PubMed Medline, SCOPUS, Web of Science, CINAHL, PEDro and SciELO up until October 2022. We selected clinical trials that assessed the effectiveness of HRS therapy, compared to other interventions, in patients with CP. The main variables were gross motor function (its global score and dimensions, such as sitting ability), functional balance, spasticity, hip range of motion (ROM), posturographic balance and satisfaction. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. The pooled effect was calculated using Cohen’s Standardized Mean Difference (SMD) for a 95% confidence interval (95% CI). Results: Twelve studies were included in the systematic review, and 10 were included in the meta-analysis, providing data from 343 patients with spastic diplegic CP. Our findings revealed that HRS plus physiotherapy is more effective than physiotherapy in improving the total gross motor function (SMD 0.98; 95% CI 0.35–1.62), sitting ability of the gross motor function (SMD 0.84; 95% CI 0.32–1.36) and functional balance (SMD 0.6; 95% CI 0.1–1.08), and HRS therapy is better than sham to improve pelvic abduction ROM (SMD 0.79; 95% CI 0.21–1.37). Conclusions: Horse-riding simulator-based therapy is an effective therapy to improve gross motor function, functional balance and abduction pelvic ROM in children with CP, in comparison to physiotherapy or sham

Validation and Cross-Cultural Adaptation of the Spanish Version of the Pain Sensitivity Questionnaire (PSQ-S)

Experimental pain testing requires specific equipment and may be uncomfortable for patients. The Pain Sensitivity Questionnaire (PSQ) was developed to assess pain sensitivity, based on the pain intensity ratings (range: 0–10) of painful situations that occur in daily life. The main objective of this study was to carry out a cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Spanish version of the PSQ (PSQ-S). A total of 354 subjects (296 healthy and 58 chronic pain patients) filled in the PSQ-S. A subgroup of 116 subjects performed experimental pain testing, including two modalities (cold and pressure), with different measures: pain intensity rating, pressure pain threshold, and tolerance. The validation results showed two factors: PSQ-S-moderate and PSQ-S-minor and, for the total scale and the two factors, an excellent internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha coefficient > 0.9) and a substantial reliability (Intraclass Correlation Coefficient > 0.8). We obtained strong correlations with all the experimental pain rating parameters, catastrophizing, and depression variables, as well as moderate correlations with anxiety, central sensibilization, and impact on the quality of life. Chronic pain patients received elevated PSQ-S scores compared to healthy controls, and three cut-off values (PSQ-S-total = 7.00, PSQ-S-moderate = 7.57, and PSQ-S-minor = 6.29) based on ROC curve analyses were shown to be able to discriminate between healthy adults and adults with chronic pain. Therefore, PSQ-S may be a simple alternative to experimental pain procedures for clinical and experimental pain research

Leap Motion Controller Video Game-Based Therapy for Upper Extremity Motor Recovery in Patients with Central Nervous System Diseases. A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis

Leap Motion Controller (LMC) is a virtual reality device that can be used in the rehabilitation of central nervous system disease (CNSD) motor impairments. This review aimed to evaluate the effect of video game-based therapy with LMC on the recovery of upper extremity (UE) motor function in patients with CNSD. A systematic review with meta-analysis was performed in PubMed Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL, and PEDro. We included five randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of patients with CNSD in which LMC was used as experimental therapy compared to conventional therapy (CT) to restore UE motor function. Pooled effects were estimated with Cohen’s standardized mean difference (SMD) and its 95% confidence interval (95% CI). At first, in patients with stroke, LMC showed low-quality evidence of a large effect on UE mobility (SMD = 0.96; 95% CI = 0.47, 1.45). In combination with CT, LMC showed very low-quality evidence of a large effect on UE mobility (SMD = 1.34; 95% CI = 0.49, 2.19) and the UE mobility-oriented task (SMD = 1.26; 95% CI = 0.42, 2.10). Second, in patients with non-acute CNSD (cerebral palsy, multiple sclerosis, and Parkinson’s disease), LMC showed low-quality evidence of a medium effect on grip strength (GS) (SMD = 0.47; 95% CI = 0.03, 0.90) and on gross motor dexterity (GMD) (SMD = 0.73; 95% CI = 0.28, 1.17) in the most affected UE. In combination with CT, LMC showed very low-quality evidence of a high effect in the most affected UE on GMD (SMD = 0.80; 95% CI = 0.06, 1.15) and fine motor dexterity (FMD) (SMD = 0.82; 95% CI = 0.07, 1.57). In stroke, LMC improved UE mobility and UE mobility-oriented tasks, and in non-acute CNSD, LMC improved the GS and GMD of the most affected UE and FMD when it was used with CT