Posts Tagged recovery of function

[Abstract] Effects of Bihemispheric Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Upper Extremity Function in Stroke Patients: A randomized Double-Blind Sham-Controlled Study

Abstract

Background and Purpose

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a treatment used in the rehabilitation of stroke patients aiming to improve functionality of the plegic upper extremity. Currently, tDCS is not routinely used in post stroke rehabilitation. The aim of this study was to establish the effects of bihemspheric tDCS combined with physical therapy (PT) and occupational therapy (OT) on upper extremity motor function.

Methods

Thirty-two stroke inpatients were randomised into 2 groups. All patients received 15 sessions of conventional upper extremity PT and OT over 3 weeks. The tDCS group (n = 16) also received 30 minutes of bihemispheric tDCS and the sham group (n = 16) 30 minutes of sham bihemispheric tDCS simultaneously to OT. Patients were evaluated before and after treatment using the Fugl Meyer upper extremity (FMUE), functional independence measure (FIM), and Brunnstrom stages of stroke recovery (BSSR) by a physiatrist blind to the treatment group

Results

The improvement in FIM was higher in the tDCS group compared to the sham group (P = .001). There was a significant within group improvement in FMUE, FIM and BSSR in those receiving tDCS (P = .001). There was a significant improvement in FIM in the chronic (> 6months) stroke sufferers who received tDCS when compared to those who received sham tDCS and when compared to subacute stroke (3-6 months) sufferers who received tDCS/sham.

Conclusions

Upper extremity motor function in hemiplegic stroke patients improves when bihemispheric tDCS is used alongside conventional PT and OT. The improvement in functionality is greater in chronic stroke patients.

via Effects of Bihemispheric Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Upper Extremity Function in Stroke Patients: A randomized Double-Blind Sham-Controlled Study – ScienceDirect

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

[Abstract + References] Effectiveness and Superiority of Rehabilitative Treatments in Enhancing Motor Recovery Within 6 Months Poststroke: A Systemic Review

Abstract

Objective

To investigate the effects of various rehabilitative interventions aimed at enhancing poststroke motor recovery by assessing their effectiveness when compared with no treatment or placebo and their superiority when compared with conventional training program (CTP).

Data Source

A literature search was based on 19 Cochrane reviews and 26 other reviews. We also updated the searches in PubMed up to September 30, 2017.

Study Selection

Randomized controlled trials associated with 18 experimented training programs (ETP) were included if they evaluated the effects of the programs on either upper extremity (UE) or lower extremity (LE) motor recovery among adults within 6 months poststroke; included ≥10 participants in each arm; and had an intervention duration of ≥10 consecutive weekdays.

Data Extraction

Four reviewers evaluated the eligibility and quality of literature. Methodological quality was assessed using the PEDro scale.

Data Synthesis

Among the 178 included studies, 129 including 7450 participants were analyzed in this meta-analysis. Six ETPs were significantly effective in enhancing UE motor recovery, with the standard mean differences (SMDs) and 95% confidence intervals outlined as follow: constraint-induced movement therapy (0.82, 0.45-1.19), electrostimulation (ES)-motor (0.42, 0.22-0.63), mirror therapy (0.71, 0.22-1.20), mixed approach (0.21, 0.01-0.41), robot-assisted training (0.51, 0.22-0.80), and task-oriented training (0.57, 0.16-0.99). Six ETPs were significantly effective in enhancing LE motor recovery: body-weight-supported treadmill training (0.27, 0.01-0.52), caregiver-mediated training (0.64, 0.20-1.08), ES-motor (0.55, 0.27-0.83), mixed approach (0.35, 0.15-0.54), mirror therapy (0.56, 0.13-1.00), and virtual reality (0.60, 0.15-1.05). However, compared with CTPs, almost none of the ETPs exhibited significant SMDs for superiority.

Conclusions

Certain experimented interventions were effective in enhancing poststroke motor recovery, but little evidence supported the superiority of experimented interventions over conventional rehabilitation.

References

  1. Langhorne, P., Bernhardt, J., Kwakkel, G. Stroke rehabilitation. Lancet2011;377:1693–1702
  2. Langhorne, P., Coupar, F., Pollock, A. Motor recovery after stroke: a systematic review. Lancet Neurol2009;8:741–754
  3. Veerbeek, J.M., van Wegen, E., van Peppen, R. et al, What is the evidence for physical therapy poststroke? A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One2014;9e87987
  4. Pollock, A., Farmer, S.E., Brady, M.C. et al, Interventions for improving upper limb function after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2014;:Cd010820
  5. Lohse, K.R., Lang, C.E., Boyd, L.A. Is more better? Using metadata to explore dose-response relationships in stroke rehabilitation. Stroke2014;45:2053–2058
  6. Cooke, E.V., Mares, K., Clark, A., Tallis, R.C., Pomeroy, V.M. The effects of increased dose of exercise-based therapies to enhance motor recovery after stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Med2010;8:60
  7. Schneider, E.J., Lannin, N.A., Ada, L., Schmidt, J. Increasing the amount of usual rehabilitation improves activity after stroke: a systematic review. J Physiother2016;62:182–187
  8. Chang, K.H., Chen, H.C., Lin, Y., Chen, S.C., Chiou, H.Y., Liou, T.H. Developing an ICF core set for post-stroke disability assessment and verification in Taiwan: a preliminary study. Disabil Rehabil2012;34:1254–1261
  9. Kwakkel, G., Kollen, B., Twisk, J. Impact of time on improvement of outcome after stroke. Stroke2006;37:2348–2353
  10. Coupar, F., Pollock, A., van Wijck, F., Morris, J., Langhorne, P. Simultaneous bilateral training for improving arm function after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2010;:Cd006432
  11. Mehrholz, J., Thomas, S., Elsner, B. Treadmill training and body weight support for walking after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2017;8:Cd002840
  12. Vloothuis, J.D., Mulder, M., Veerbeek, J.M. et al, Caregiver-mediated exercises for improving outcomes after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2016;12:Cd011058
  13. Coupar, F., Pollock, A., Legg, L.A., Sackley, C., van Vliet, P. Home-based therapy programmes for upper limb functional recovery following stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2012;:Cd006755
  14. Corbetta, D., Sirtori, V., Castellini, G., Moja, L., Gatti, R. Constraint-induced movement therapy for upper extremities in people with stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2015;:Cd004433
  15. Woodford, H., Price, C. EMG biofeedback for the recovery of motor function after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2007;:Cd004585
  16. Pomeroy, V.M., King, L., Pollock, A., Baily-Hallam, A., Langhorne, P. Electrostimulation for promoting recovery of movement or functional ability after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2006;:Cd003241
  17. Barclay-Goddard, R., Stevenson, T., Poluha, W., Moffatt, M.E., Taback, S.P. Force platform feedback for standing balance training after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2004;:Cd004129
  18. Barclay-Goddard, R.E., Stevenson, T.J., Poluha, W., Thalman, L. Mental practice for treating upper extremity deficits in individuals with hemiparesis after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2011;:Cd005950
  19. Thieme, H., Mehrholz, J., Pohl, M., Behrens, J., Dohle, C. Mirror therapy for improving motor function after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2012;:Cd008449
  20. Pollock, A., Baer, G., Campbell, P. et al, Physical rehabilitation approaches for the recovery of function and mobility following stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2014;:Cd001920
  21. Legg, L.A., Drummond, A.E., Langhorne, P. Occupational therapy for patients with problems in activities of daily living after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2006;:Cd003585
  22. Pollock, A., Gray, C., Culham, E., Durward, B.R., Langhorne, P. Interventions for improving sit-to-stand ability following stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2014;:Cd007232
  23. Magee, W.L., Clark, I., Tamplin, J., Bradt, J. Music interventions for acquired brain injury. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2017;1:Cd006787
  24. Mehrholz, J., Pohl, M., Platz, T., Kugler, J., Elsner, B. Electromechanical and robot-assisted arm training for improving activities of daily living, arm function, and arm muscle strength after stroke.Cochrane Database Syst Rev2015;:Cd006876
  25. Mehrholz, J., Thomas, S., Werner, C., Kugler, J., Pohl, M., Elsner, B. Electromechanical-assisted training for walking after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2017;5:Cd006185
  26. French, B., Thomas, L.H., Coupe, J. et al, Repetitive task training for improving functional ability after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2016;11:Cd006073
  27. Laver, K.E., Lange, B., George, S., Deutsch, J.E., Saposnik, G., Crotty, M. Virtual reality for stroke rehabilitation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2017;11:Cd008349
  28. Kwakkel, G., Veerbeek, J.M., van Wegen, E.E., Wolf, S.L. Constraint-induced movement therapy after stroke. Lancet Neurol2015;14:224–234
  29. Etoom, M., Hawamdeh, M., Hawamdeh, Z. et al, Constraint-induced movement therapy as a rehabilitation intervention for upper extremity in stroke patients: systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Rehabil Res2016;39:197–210
  30. Plummer, P., Eskes, G., Wallace, S. et al, Cognitive-motor interference during functional mobility after stroke: state of the science and implications for future research. Arch Phys Med Rehabil2013;94:2565–2574.e6
  31. Wang, X.Q., Pi, Y.L., Chen, B.L. et al, Cognitive motor interference for gait and balance in stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Neurol2015;22:555–e37
  32. Ghai, S., Ghai, I., Effenberg, A.O. Effects of dual tasks and dual-task training on postural stability: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Interv Aging2017;12:557–577
  33. Stanton, R., Ada, L., Dean, C.M., Preston, E. Biofeedback improves performance in lower limb activities more than usual therapy in people following stroke: a systematic review. J Physiother2017;63:11–16
  34. Howlett, O.A., Lannin, N.A., Ada, L., McKinstry, C. Functional electrical stimulation improves activity after stroke: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil2015;96:934–943
  35. Laufer, Y., Elboim-Gabyzon, M. Does sensory transcutaneous electrical stimulation enhance motor recovery following a stroke? A systematic review. Neurorehabil Neural Repair2011;25:799–809
  36. Kho, A.Y., Liu, K.P., Chung, R.C. Meta-analysis on the effect of mental imagery on motor recovery of the hemiplegic upper extremity function. Aust Occup Ther J2014;61:38–48
  37. Li, R.Q., Li, Z.M., Tan, J.Y., Chen, G.L., Lin, W.Y. Effects of motor imagery on walking function and balance in patients after stroke: A quantitative synthesis of randomized controlled trials. Complement Ther Clin Pract2017;28:75–84
  38. Tong, Y., Pendy, J.T. Jr., Li, W.A. et al, Motor imagery-based rehabilitation: potential neural correlates and clinical application for functional recovery of motor deficits after stroke. Aging Dis2017;8:364–371
  39. Perez-Cruzado, D., Merchan-Baeza, J.A., Gonzalez-Sanchez, M., Cuesta-Vargas, A.I. Systematic review of mirror therapy compared with conventional rehabilitation in upper extremity function in stroke survivors. Aust Occup Ther J2017;64:91–112
  40. Deconinck, F.J., Smorenburg, A.R., Benham, A., Ledebt, A., Feltham, M.G., Savelsbergh, G.J.Reflections on mirror therapy: a systematic review of the effect of mirror visual feedback on the brain. Neurorehabil Neural Repair2015;29:349–361
  41. Resquin, F., Cuesta Gomez, A., Gonzalez-Vargas, J. et al, Hybrid robotic systems for upper limb rehabilitation after stroke: a review. Med Eng Phys2016;38:1279–1288
  42. Veerbeek, J.M., Langbroek-Amersfoort, A.C., van Wegen, E.E., Meskers, C.G., Kwakkel, G. Effects of robot-assisted therapy for the upper limb after stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair2017;31:107–121
  43. Bertani, R., Melegari, C., De Cola, M.C., Bramanti, A., Bramanti, P., Calabro, R.S. Effects of robot-assisted upper limb rehabilitation in stroke patients: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Neurol Sci2017;38:1561–1569
  44. Zhang, X., Yue, Z. Robotics in Lower-Limb Rehabilitation after Stroke. Behav Neurol2017;2017:3731802
  45. Ada, L., Dorsch, S., Canning, C.G. Strengthening interventions increase strength and improve activity after stroke: a systematic review. Aust J Physiother2006;52:241–248
  46. Harris, J.E., Eng, J.J. Strength training improves upper-limb function in individuals with stroke: a meta-analysis. Stroke2010;41:136–140
  47. Yang, X., Wang, P., Liu, C., He, C., Reinhardt, J.D. The effect of whole body vibration on balance, gait performance and mobility in people with stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Rehabil2015;29:627–638
  48. van Delden, A.E., Peper, C.E., Beek, P.J., Kwakkel, G. Unilateral versus bilateral upper limb exercise therapy after stroke: a systematic review. J Rehabil Med2012;44:106–117
  49. Wattchow, K.A., McDonnell, M.N., Hillier, S.L. Rehabilitation interventions for upper limb function in the first four weeks following stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the evidence. Arch Phys Med Rehabil2018;99:367–382
  50. de Morton, N.A. The PEDro scale is a valid measure of the methodological quality of clinical trials: a demographic study. Aust J Physiother2009;55:129–133
  51. Lang, C.E., Lohse, K.R., Birkenmeier, R.L. Dose and timing in neurorehabilitation: prescribing motor therapy after stroke. Curr Opin Neurol2015;28:549–555
  52. Marquez-Chin, C., Bagher, S., Zivanovic, V., Popovic, M.R. Functional electrical stimulation therapy for severe hemiplegia: randomized control trial revisited. Can J Occup Ther2017;84:87–97
  53. Kwakkel, G., Winters, C., van Wegen, E.E. et al, Effects of unilateral upper limb training in two distinct prognostic groups early after stroke: the EXPLICIT-stroke randomized clinical trial.Neurorehabil Neural Repair2016;30:804–816
  54. Morris, J.H., van Wijck, F., Joice, S., Ogston, S.A., Cole, I., MacWalter, R.S. A comparison of bilateral and unilateral upper-limb task training in early poststroke rehabilitation: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil2008;89:1237–1245
  55. van Delden, A.L., Peper, C.L., Nienhuys, K.N., Zijp, N.I., Beek, P.J., Kwakkel, G. Unilateral versus bilateral upper limb training after stroke. the Upper Limb Training After Stroke clinical trial. Stroke2013;44:2613–2616
  56. Brunner, I.C., Skouen, J.S., Strand, L.I. Is modified constraint-induced movement therapy more effective than bimanual training in improving arm motor function in the subacute phase post stroke? A randomized controlled trial. Clin Rehabil2012;26:1078–1086
  57. Ozdemir, F., Birtane, M., Tabatabaei, R., Kokino, S., Ekuklu, G. Comparing stroke rehabilitation outcomes between acute in-patient and non-intense home settings. Arch Phys Med Rehabil2001;82:1375–1379
  58. Ploughman, M., Corbett, D. Can forced-use therapy be clinically applied after stroke? An exploratory randomized controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil2004;85:1414–1423
  59. Hammer, A.M., Lindmark, B. Effects of forced use on arm function in the subacute phase after stroke: a randomized, clinical pilot study. Phys Ther2009;89:526–539
  60. Boake, C., Noser, E.A., Ro, T. et al, Constraint-induced movement therapy during early stroke rehabilitation. Neurorehabil Neural Repair2007;21:14–24
  61. Dromerick, A.W., Edwards, D.F., Hahn, M., Dromerick, A.W., Edwards, D.F., Hahn, M. Does the application of constraint-induced movement therapy during acute rehabilitation reduce arm impairment after ischemic stroke?. Stroke2000;31:2984–2988
  62. Dromerick, A.W., Lang, C.E., Birkenmeier, R.L. et al, Very early constraint-induced movement during stroke rehabilitation (VECTORS): a single-center RCT. Neurology2009;73:195–201
  63. Liu, K.P., Balderi, K., Leung, T.L. et al, A randomized controlled trial of self-regulated modified constraint-induced movement therapy in sub-acute stroke patients. Eur J Neurol2016;23:1351–1360
  64. Myint, J.M., Yuen, G.F., Yu, T.K. et al, A study of constraint-induced movement therapy in subacute stroke patients in Hong Kong. Clin Rehabil2008;22:112–124
  65. Singh, P., Pradhan, B. Study to assess the effectiveness of modified constraint-induced movement therapy in stroke subjects: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Indian Acad Neurol2013;16:180–184
  66. Stock, R., Thrane, G., Anke, A., Gjone, R., Askim, T. Early versus late-applied constraint-induced movement therapy: a multisite, randomized controlled trial with a 12-month follow-up. Physiother Res Int2018;23
  67. Yu, C., Wang, W., Zhang, Y. et al, The effects of modified constraint-induced movement therapy in acute subcortical cerebral infarction. Front Hum Neurosci2017;11:265
  68. El-Helow, M.R., Zamzam, M.L., Fathalla, M.M. et al, Efficacy of modified constraint-induced movement therapy in acute stroke. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med2015;51:371–379
  69. Thrane, G., Askim, T., Stock, R. et al, Efficacy of constraint-induced movement therapy in early stroke rehabilitation: a randomized controlled multisite trial. Neurorehabil Neural Repair2015;29:517–525
  70. Seok, H., Lee, S.Y., Kim, J., Yeo, J., Kang, H. Can short-term constraint-induced movement therapy combined with visual biofeedback training improve hemiplegic upper limb function of subacute stroke patients?. Ann Rehabil Med2016;40:998–1009
  71. Armagan, O., Tascioglu, F., Oner, C. Electromyographic biofeedback in the treatment of the hemiplegic hand: a placebo-controlled study. Am J Phys Med Rehabil2003;82:856–861
  72. Crow, J.L., Lincoln, N.B., Nouri, F.M., de Weerdt, W. The effectiveness of EMG biofeedback in the treatment of arm function after stroke. Int Disabil Stud1989;11:155–160
  73. Hemmen, B., Seelen, H.A. Effects of movement imagery and electromyography-triggered feedback on arm hand function in stroke patients in the subacute phase. Clin Rehabil2007;21:587–594
  74. Chae, J., Bethoux, F., Bohinc, T., Dobos, L., Davis, T., Friedl, A. Neuromuscular stimulation for upper extremity motor and functional recovery in acute hemiplegia. Stroke1998;29:975–979
  75. Dorsch, S., Ada, L., Canning, C.G. EMG-triggered electrical stimulation is a feasible intervention to apply to multiple arm muscles in people early after stroke, but does not improve strength and activity more than usual therapy: a randomized feasibility trial. Clin Rehabil2014;28:482–490
  76. Heckmann, J., Mokrusch, T., Krockel, A., Warnke, S., von Stockert, W.T., Neundorfer, B. EMG-triggered electrical muscle stimulation in the treatment of central hemiparesis after a stroke. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med1997;7:138–141
  77. Hsu, S.S., Hu, M.H., Wang, Y.H., Yip, P.K., Chiu, J.W., Hsieh, C.L. Dose-response relation between neuromuscular electrical stimulation and upper-extremity function in patients with stroke. Stroke2010;41:821–824
  78. Lin, Z., Yan, T. Long-term effectiveness of neuromuscular electrical stimulation for promoting motor recovery of the upper extremity after stroke. J Rehabil Med2011;43:506–510
  79. Powell, J.P.A., Granat, M., Cameron, M., Stott, D.J. Electrical stimulation of wrist extensors in poststroke hemiplegia. Stroke1999;30:1384–1389
  80. Rosewilliam, S., Malhotra, S., Roffe, C., Jones, P., Pandyan, A.D. Can surface neuromuscular electrical stimulation of the wrist and hand combined with routine therapy facilitate recovery of arm function in patients with stroke?. Arch Phys Med Rehabil2012;93:1715–1721 (.e1)
  81. Shindo, K., Fujiwara, T., Hara, J. et al, Effectiveness of hybrid assistive neuromuscular dynamic stimulation therapy in patients with subacute stroke: a randomized controlled pilot trial. Neurorehabil Neural Repair2011;25:830–837
  82. Wilson, R.D., Page, S.J., Delahanty, M. et al, Upper-limb recovery after stroke: a randomized controlled trial comparing EMG-triggered, cyclic, and sensory electrical stimulation. Neurorehabil Neural Repair2016;30:978–987
  83. Yozbatiran, N., Donmez, B., Kayak, N., Bozan, O. Electrical stimulation of wrist and fingers for sensory and functional recovery in acute hemiplegia. Clin Rehabil2006;20:4–11
  84. Conforto, A.B., Ferreiro, K.N., Tomasi, C. et al, Effects of somatosensory stimulation on motor function after subacute stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair2010;24:263–272
  85. Miyasaka, H., Orand, A., Ohnishi, H., Tanino, G., Takeda, K., Sonoda, S. Ability of electrical stimulation therapy to improve the effectiveness of robotic training for paretic upper limbs in patients with stroke. Med Eng Phys2016;38:1172–1175
  86. Ietswaart, M., Johnston, M., Dijkerman, H.C. et al, Mental practice with motor imagery in stroke recovery: randomized controlled trial of efficacy. Brain2011;134:1373–1386
  87. Riccio, I., Iolascon, G., Barillari, M.R., Gimigliano, R., Gimigliano, F. Mental practice is effective in upper limb recovery after stroke: a randomized single-blind cross-over study. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med2010;46:19–25
  88. Liu, H., Song, L.P., Zhang, T. Mental practice combined with physical practice to enhance hand recovery in stroke patients. Behav Neurol2014;2014:876416
  89. Braun, S.M., Beurskens, A.J., Kleynen, M., Oudelaar, B., Schols, J.M., Wade, D.T. A multicenter randomized controlled trial to compare subacute ‘treatment as usual’ with and without mental practice among persons with stroke in Dutch nursing homes. J Am Med Dir Assoc2012;13:85.e1–85.e7
  90. Liu, K.P. Use of mental imagery to improve task generalisation after a stroke. Hong Kong Med J2009;15:37–41
  91. Invernizzi, M., Negrini, S., Carda, S., Lanzotti, L., Cisari, C., Baricich, A. The value of adding mirror therapy for upper limb motor recovery of subacute stroke patients: a randomized controlled trial. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med2013;49:311–317
  92. Lee, M.M., Cho, H.Y., Song, C.H. The mirror therapy program enhances upper-limb motor recovery and motor function in acute stroke patients. Am J Phys Med Rehabil2012;91:689–696
  93. Gurbuz, N., Afsar, S.I., Ayas, S., Cosar, S.N. Effect of mirror therapy on upper extremity motor function in stroke patients: a randomized controlled trial. J Phys Ther Sci2016;28:2501–2506
  94. Radajewska, A., Opara, J., Bilinski, G. et al, Effectiveness of mirror therapy for subacute stroke in relation to chosen factors. Rehabil Nurs2017;42:223–229
  95. Samuelkamaleshkumar, S., Reethajanetsureka, S., Pauljebaraj, P., Benshamir, B., Padankatti, S.M., David, J.A. Mirror therapy enhances motor performance in the paretic upper limb after stroke: a pilot randomized controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil2014;95:2000–2005
  96. Tyson, S., Wilkinson, J., Thomas, N. et al, Phase II pragmatic randomized controlled trial of patient-led therapies (mirror therapy and lower-limb exercises) during inpatient stroke rehabilitation.Neurorehabil Neural Repair2015;29:818–826
  97. Thieme, H., Bayn, M., Wurg, M., Zange, C., Pohl, M., Behrens, J. Mirror therapy for patients with severe arm paresis after stroke – a randomized controlled trial. Clin Rehabil2013;27:314–324
  98. Dohle, C., Pullen, J., Nakaten, A., Kust, J., Rietz, C., Karbe, H. Mirror therapy promotes recovery from severe hemiparesis: a randomized controlled trial. Neurorehabil Neural Repair2009;23:209–217
  99. Kim, H., Lee, G., Song, C. Effect of functional electrical stimulation with mirror therapy on upper extremity motor function in poststroke patients. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis2014;23:655–661
  100. Schick, T., Schlake, H.P., Kallusky, J. et al, Synergy effects of combined multichannel EMG-triggered electrical stimulation and mirror therapy in subacute stroke patients with severe or very severe arm/hand paresis. Restor Neurol Neurosci2017;
  101. Lim, K.B., Lee, H.J., Yoo, J., Yun, H.J., Hwang, H.J. Efficacy of mirror therapy containing functional tasks in poststroke patients. Ann Rehabil Med2016;40:629–636
  102. Donaldson, C., Tallis, R., Miller, S., Sunderland, A., Lemon, R., Pomeroy, V. Effects of conventional physical therapy and functional strength training on upper limb motor recovery after stroke: a randomized phase II study. Neurorehabil Neural Repair2009;23:389–397
  103. Han, C., Wang, Q., Meng, P.P., Qi, M.Z. Effects of intensity of arm training on hemiplegic upper extremity motor recovery in stroke patients: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Rehabil2013;27:75–81
  104. Harris, J.E., Eng, J.J., Miller, W.C., Dawson, A.S. A self-administered Graded Repetitive Arm Supplementary Program (GRASP) improves arm function during inpatient stroke rehabilitation: a multi-site randomized controlled trial. Stroke2009;40:2123–2128
  105. Kong, K.H., Loh, Y.J., Thia, E. et al, Efficacy of a virtual reality commercial gaming device in upper limb recovery after stroke: a randomized, controlled study. Top Stroke Rehabil2016;23:333–340
  106. Kwakkel, G., Wagenaar, R.C., Twisk, J.W., Lankhorst, G.J., Koetsier, J.C. Intensity of leg and arm training after primary middle-cerebral-artery stroke: a randomised trial. Lancet1999;354:191–196
  107. Glasgow Augmented Physiotherapy Study (GAPS) Group. Can augmented physiotherapy input enhance recovery of mobility after stroke? A randomized controlled trial. Clin Rehabil2004;18:529–537
  108. Yelnik, A.P., Quintaine, V., Andriantsifanetra, C. et al, AMOBES (Active Mobility Very Early After Stroke): a randomized controlled trial. Stroke2017;48:400–405
  109. Platz, T., van Kaick, S., Mehrholz, J., Leidner, O., Eickhof, C., Pohl, M. Best conventional therapy versus modular impairment-oriented training for arm paresis after stroke: a single-blind, multicenter randomized controlled trial. Neurorehabil Neural Repair2009;23:706–716
  110. Schneider, S., Schonle, P.W., Altenmuller, E., Munte, T.F. Using musical instruments to improve motor skill recovery following a stroke. J Neurol2007;254:1339–1346
  111. Schneider, S., Münte, T., Rodriguez-Fornells, A., Sailer, M., Altenmuller, E. Music-supported training is more efficient than functional motor training for recovery of fine motor skills in stroke patients.Music Perception2010;27:271–280
  112. Jun, E.M., Roh, Y.H., Kim, M.J. The effect of music-movement therapy on physical and psychological states of stroke patients. J Clin Nurs2013;22:22–31
  113. Masiero, S., Celia, A., Rosati, G., Armani, M. Robotic-assisted rehabilitation of the upper limb after acute stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil2007;88:142–149
  114. Fasoli, S.E., Krebs, H.I., Ferraro, M., Hogan, N., Volpe, B.T. Does shorter rehabilitation limit potential recovery poststroke?. Neurorehabil Neural Repair2004;18:88–94
  115. Masiero, S., Celia, A., Armani, M., Rosati, G. A novel robot device in rehabilitation of post-stroke hemiplegic upper limbs. Aging Clin Exp Res2006;18:531–535
  116. Aisen, M.L., Krebs, H.I., Hogan, N., McDowell, F., Volpe, B.T. The effect of robot-assisted therapy and rehabilitative training on motor recovery following stroke. Arch Neurol1997;54:443–446
  117. Volpe, B., Krebs, H., Hogan, N., Edelstein, L., Diels, C., Aisen, M. A novel approach to stroke rehabilitation robot-aided sensorimotor stimulation. Neurology2000;54:1938–1944
  118. Burgar, C.G., Lum, P.S., Scremin, A.M. et al, Robot-assisted upper-limb therapy in acute rehabilitation setting following stroke: Department of Veterans Affairs multisite clinical trial. J Rehabil Res Dev2011;48:445–458
  119. Hesse, S., Heß, A., Werner, C.C., Kabbert, N., Buschfort, R. Effect on arm function and cost of robot-assisted group therapy in subacute patients with stroke and a moderately to severely affected arm: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Rehabil2014;28:637–647
  120. Hsieh, Y.W., Wu, C.Y., Wang, W.E. et al, Bilateral robotic priming before task-oriented approach in subacute stroke rehabilitation: a pilot randomized controlled trial. Clin Rehabil2017;31:225–233
  121. Lee, K.W., Kim, S.B., Lee, J.H., Lee, S.J., Yoo, S.W. Effect of upper extremity robot-assisted exercise on spasticity in stroke patients. Ann Rehabil Med2016;40:961–971
  122. Masiero, S., Armani, M., Rosati, G. Upper-limb robot-assisted therapy in rehabilitation of acute stroke patients: focused review and results of new randomized controlled trial. J Rehabil Res Dev2011;48:355–366
  123. Rabadi, M., Galgano, M., Lynch, D., Akerman, M., Lesser, M., Volpe, B. A pilot study of activity-based therapy in the arm motor recovery post stroke: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Rehabil2008;22:1071–1082
  124. Sale, P., Franceschini, M., Mazzoleni, S., Palma, E., Agosti, M., Posteraro, F. Effects of upper limb robot-assisted therapy on motor recovery in subacute stroke patients. J Neuroeng Rehabil2014;11:104
  125. Takahashi, K., Domen, K., Sakamoto, T. et al, Efficacy of upper extremity robotic therapy in subacute poststroke hemiplegia: an exploratory randomized trial. Stroke2016;47:1385–1388
  126. Wolf, S.L., Sahu, K., Bay, R.C. et al, The HAAPI (Home Arm Assistance Progression Initiative) Trial: a novel robotics delivery approach in stroke rehabilitation. Neurorehabil Neural Repair2015;29:958–968
  127. Qian, Q., Hu, X., Lai, Q., Ng, S.C., Zheng, Y., Poon, W. Early stroke rehabilitation of the upper limb assisted with an electromyography-driven neuromuscular electrical stimulation-robotic arm. Front Neurol2017;8:447
  128. Winstein, C.J., Rose, D.K., Tan, S.M., Lewthwaite, R., Chui, H.C., Azen, S.P. A randomized controlled comparison of upper-extremity rehabilitation strategies in acute stroke: a pilot study of immediate and long-term outcomes. Arch Phys Med Rehabil2004;85:620–628
  129. Blennerhassett, J., Dite, W. Additional task-related practice improves mobility and upper limb function early after stroke: a randomised controlled trial. Aust J Physiother2004;50:219–224
  130. Hubbard, I.J., Carey, L.M., Budd, T.W. et al, A randomized controlled trial of the effect of early upper-limb training on stroke recovery and brain activation. Neurorehabil Neural Repair2015;29:703–713
  131. Arya, K., Verma, R., Garg, R., Sharma, V., Agarwal, M., Aggarwal, G. Meaningful task-specific training (MTST) for stroke rehabilitation: a randomized controlled trial. Top Stroke Rehabil2012;19:193–211
  132. Desrosiers, J., Bourbonnais, D., Corriveau, H., Gosselin, S., Bravo, G. Effectiveness of unilateral and symmetrical bilateral task training for arm during the subacute phase after stroke: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Rehabil2005;19:581–593
  133. Gelber, D.A., Josefczyk, P.B., Herrman, D., Good, D.C., Verhulst, S.J. Comparison of two therapy approaches in the rehabilitation of the pure motor hemiparetic stroke patient. Neurorehabil Neural Repair1995;9:191–196
  134. Langhammer, B., Stanghelle, J.K. Bobath or motor relearning programme? A comparison of two different approaches of physiotherapy in stroke rehabilitation: a randomized controlled study. Clin Rehabil2000;14:361–369
  135. van Vliet, P.M., Lincoln, N.B., Foxall, A. Comparison of Bobath based and movement science based treatment for stroke: a randomised controlled trial. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry2005;76:503–508
  136. Winstein, C.J., Wolf, S.L., Dromerick, A.W. et al, Effect of a task-oriented rehabilitation program on upper extremity recovery following motor stroke: the ICARE randomized clinical trial. JAMA2016;315:571–581
  137. Kwon, J.-S., Park, M.-J., Yoon, I.-J., Park, S.-H. Effects of virtual reality on upper extremity function and activities of daily living performance in acute stroke: a double-blind randomized clinical trial.NeuroRehabilitation2012;31:379–385
  138. Bower, K.J., Clark, R.A., McGinley, J.L., Martin, C.L., Miller, K.J. Clinical feasibility of the Nintendo Wii for balance training post-stroke: a phase II randomized controlled trial in an inpatient setting. Clin Rehabil2014;28:912–923
  139. Choi, J.H., Han, E.Y., Kim, B.R. et al, Effectiveness of commercial gaming-based virtual reality movement therapy on functional recovery of upper extremity in subacute stroke patients. Ann Rehabil Med2014;38:485–493
  140. Adie, K., Schofield, C., Berrow, M. et al, Does the use of Nintendo Wii Sports(TM) improve arm function? Trial of Wii(TM) in Stroke: a randomized controlled trial and economics analysis. Clin Rehabil2017;31:173–185
  141. Saposnik, G., Cohen, L.G., Mamdani, M. et al, Efficacy and safety of non-immersive virtual reality exercising in stroke rehabilitation (EVREST): a randomised, multicentre, single-blind, controlled trial.Lancet Neurol2016;15:1019–1027
  142. Saposnik, G., Teasell, R., Mamdani, M. et al, Effectiveness of virtual reality using Wii gaming technology in stroke rehabilitation. Stroke2010;41:1477–1484
  143. Prange, G.B., Kottink, A.I., Buurke, J.H. et al, The effect of arm support combined with rehabilitation games on upper-extremity function in subacute stroke: a randomized controlled trial.Neurorehabil Neural Repair2015;29:174–182
  144. Duncan, P.W., Sullivan, K.J., Behrman, A.L. et al, Body-weight–supported treadmill rehabilitation after stroke. N Engl J Med2011;364:2026–2036
  145. Mackay-Lyons, M., McDonald, A., Matheson, J., Eskes, G., Klus, M.A. Dual effects of body-weight supported treadmill training on cardiovascular fitness and walking ability early after stroke: a randomized controlled trial. Neurorehabil Neural Repair2013;27:644–653
  146. Mao, Y.R., Lo, W.L., Lin, Q. et al, The effect of body weight support treadmill training on gait recovery, proximal lower limb motor pattern, and balance in patients with subacute stroke. Biomed Res Int2015;2015:175719
  147. Nilsson, L., Carlsson, J., Danielsson, A. et al, Walking training of patients with hemiparesis at an early stage after stroke: a comparison of walking training on a treadmill with body weight support and walking training on the ground. Clin Rehabil2001;15:515–527
  148. Galvin, R., Cusack, T., O’Grady, E., Murphy, T.B., Stokes, E. Family-mediated exercise intervention (FAME): evaluation of a novel form of exercise delivery after stroke. Stroke2011;42:681–686
  149. van den Berg, M., Crotty, M.P., Liu, E., Killington, M., Kwakkel, G.P., van Wegen, E. Early supported discharge by caregiver-mediated exercises and e-health support after stroke: a proof-of-concept trial. Stroke2016;47:1885–1892
  150. Choi, J.H., Kim, B.R., Han, E.Y., Kim, S.M. The effect of dual-task training on balance and cognition in patients with subacute post-stroke. Ann Rehabil Med2015;39:81–90
  151. Wang, Y.H., Meng, F., Zhang, Y., Xu, M.Y., Yue, S.W. Full-movement neuromuscular electrical stimulation improves plantar flexor spasticity and ankle active dorsiflexion in stroke patients: a randomized controlled study. Clin Rehabil2016;30:577–586
  152. Winchester, P., Montgomery, J., Bowman, B., Hislop, H. Effects of feedback stimulation training and cyclical electrical stimulation on knee extension in hemiparetic patients. Phys Ther1983;63:1096–1103
  153. Yan, T., Hui-Chan, C.W., Li, L.S. Functional electrical stimulation improves motor recovery of the lower extremity and walking ability of subjects with first acute stroke: a randomized placebo-controlled trial. Stroke2005;36:80–85
  154. Ambrosini, E., Ferrante, S., Pedrocchi, A., Ferrigno, G., Molteni, F. Cycling induced by electrical stimulation improves motor recovery in postacute hemiparetic patients: a randomized controlled trial. Stroke2011;42:1068–1073
  155. Ferrante, S., Pedrocchi, A., Ferrigno, G., Molteni, F. Cycling induced by functional electrical stimulation improves the muscular strength and the motor control of individuals with post-acute stroke. Europa Medicophysica-SIMFER 2007 Award Winner. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med2008;44:159–167
  156. Yavuzer, G., Geler-Kulcu, D., Sonel-Tur, B., Kutlay, S., Ergin, S., Stam, H.J. Neuromuscular electric stimulation effect on lower-extremity motor recovery and gait kinematics of patients with stroke: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil2006;87:536–540
  157. Lee, H.J., Cho, K.H., Lee, W.H. The effects of body weight support treadmill training with power-assisted functional electrical stimulation on functional movement and gait in stroke patients. Am J Phys Med Rehabil2013;92:1051–1059
  158. Bauer, P., Krewer, C., Golaszewski, S., Koenig, E., Muller, F. Functional electrical stimulation-assisted active cycling–therapeutic effects in patients with hemiparesis from 7 days to 6 months after stroke: a randomized controlled pilot study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil2015;96:188–196
  159. Macdonell, R.A., Triggs, W.J., Leikauskas, J. et al, Functional electrical stimulation to the affected lower limb and recovery after cerebral infarction. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis1994;4:155–160
  160. Morone, G., Fusco, A., Di Capua, P., Coiro, P., Pratesi, L. Walking training with foot drop stimulator controlled by a tilt sensor to improve walking outcomes: a randomized controlled pilot study in patients with stroke in subacute phase. Stroke Res Treat2012;2012:523564
  161. Ng, M.F., Tong, R.K., Li, L.S. A pilot study of randomized clinical controlled trial of gait training in subacute stroke patients with partial body-weight support electromechanical gait trainer and functional electrical stimulation. Stroke2008;39:154–160
  162. Xu, Q., Guo, F., Salem, H.M.A., Chen, H., Huang, X. Effects of mirror therapy combined with neuromuscular electrical stimulation on motor recovery of lower limbs and walking ability of patients with stroke: a randomized controlled study. Clin Rehabil2017;31:1583–1591
  163. Yan, T., Hui-Chan, C.W. Transcutaneous electrical stimulation on acupuncture points improves muscle function in subjects after acute stroke: a randomized controlled trial. J Rehabil Med2009;41:312–316
  164. Yavuzer, G., Oken, O., Atay, M.B., Stam, H.J. Effect of sensory-amplitude electric stimulation on motor recovery and gait kinematics after stroke: a randomized controlled study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil2007;88:710–714
  165. Cooke, E.V., Tallis, R.C., Clark, A., Pomeroy, V.M. Efficacy of functional strength training on restoration of lower-limb motor function early after stroke: phase I randomized controlled trial.Neurorehabil Neural Repair2010;24:88–96
  166. Kerr, A., Clark, A., Cooke, E.V., Rowe, P., Pomeroy, V.M. Functional strength training and movement performance therapy produce analogous improvement in sit-to-stand early after stroke: early-phase randomised controlled trial. Physiotherapy2017;103:259–265
  167. Wang, R., Chen, H., Chen, C., Yang, Y. Efficacy of Bobath versus orthopaedic approach on impairment and function at different motor recovery stages after stroke: a randomized controlled study. Clin Rehabil2005;19:155–164
  168. Mohan, U., Babu, S.K., Kumar, K.V., Suresh, B.V., Misri, Z.K., Chakrapani, M. Effectiveness of mirror therapy on lower extremity motor recovery, balance and mobility in patients with acute stroke: a randomized sham-controlled pilot trial. Ann Indian Acad Neurol2013;16:634–639
  169. Sutbeyaz, S., Yavuzer, G., Sezer, N., Koseoglu, B.F. Mirror therapy enhances lower-extremity motor recovery and motor functioning after stroke: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil2007;88:555–559
  170. Forrester, L.W., Roy, A., Krywonis, A., Kehs, G., Krebs, H.I., Macko, R.F. Modular ankle robotics training in early subacute stroke: a randomized controlled pilot study. Neurorehabil Neural Repair2014;28:678–687
  171. Chang, W.H., Kim, M.S., Huh, J.P., Lee, P.K., Kim, Y.-H. Effects of robot-assisted gait training on cardiopulmonary fitness in subacute stroke patients: a randomized controlled study. Neurorehabil Neural Repair2012;26:318–324
  172. Han, E.Y., Im, S.H., Kim, B.R., Seo, M.J., Kim, M.O. Robot-assisted gait training improves brachial–ankle pulse wave velocity and peak aerobic capacity in subacute stroke patients with totally dependent ambulation: randomized controlled trial. Medicine2016;95
  173. Morone, G., Bragoni, M., Iosa, M. et al, Who may benefit from robotic-assisted gait training? A randomized clinical trial in patients with subacute stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair2011;25:636–644
  174. Pohl, M., Werner, C., Holzgraefe, M. et al, Repetitive locomotor training and physiotherapy improve walking and basic activities of daily living after stroke: a single-blind, randomized multicentre trial (DEutsche GAngtrainerStudie, DEGAS). Clin Rehabil2007;21:17–27
  175. van Nunen, M.P., Gerrits, K.H., Konijnenbelt, M., Janssen, T.W., de Haan, A. Recovery of walking ability using a robotic device in subacute stroke patients: a randomized controlled study. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol2015;10:141–148
  176. Watanabe, H., Tanaka, N., Inuta, T., Saitou, H., Yanagi, H. Locomotion improvement using a hybrid assistive limb in recovery phase stroke patients: a randomized controlled pilot study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil2014;95:2006–2012
  177. Kim, C.Y., Lee, J.S., Kim, H.D., Kim, J., Lee, I.H. Lower extremity muscle activation and function in progressive task-oriented training on the supplementary tilt table during stepping-like movements in patients with acute stroke hemiparesis. J Electromyogr Kinesiol2015;25:522–530
  178. McEwen, D., Taillon-Hobson, A., Bilodeau, M., Sveistrup, H., Finestone, H. Virtual reality exercise improves mobility after stroke an inpatient randomized controlled trial. Stroke2014;45:1853–1855
  179. Guo, C., Mi, X., Liu, S. et al, Whole body vibration training improves walking performance of stroke patients with knee hyperextension: a randomized controlled pilot study. CNS Neurol Disord Drug Targets2015;14:1110–1115
  180. van Nes, I.J., Latour, H., Schils, F., Meijer, R., van Kuijk, A., Geurts, A.C. Long-term effects of 6-week whole-body vibration on balance recovery and activities of daily living in the postacute phase of stroke: a randomized, controlled trial. Stroke2006;37:2331–2335

via Effectiveness and Superiority of Rehabilitative Treatments in Enhancing Motor Recovery Within 6 Months Poststroke: A Systemic Review – Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

, , , , , ,

Leave a comment

[ARTICLE] Transcranial direct current stimulation for the treatment of motor impairment following traumatic brain injury – Full Text

Abstract

After traumatic brain injury (TBI), motor impairment is less common than neurocognitive or behavioral problems. However, about 30% of TBI survivors have reported motor deficits limiting the activities of daily living or participation. After acute primary and secondary injuries, there are subsequent changes including increased GABA-mediated inhibition during the subacute stage and neuroplastic alterations that are adaptive or maladaptive during the chronic stage. Therefore, timely and appropriate neuromodulation by transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) may be beneficial to patients with TBI for neuroprotection or restoration of maladaptive changes.

Technologically, combination of imaging-based modelling or simultaneous brain signal monitoring with tDCS could result in greater individualized optimal targeting allowing a more favorable neuroplasticity after TBI. Moreover, a combination of task-oriented training using virtual reality with tDCS can be considered as a potent tele-rehabilitation tool in the home setting, increasing the dose of rehabilitation and neuromodulation, resulting in better motor recovery.

This review summarizes the pathophysiology and possible neuroplastic changes in TBI, as well as provides the general concepts and current evidence with respect to the applicability of tDCS in motor recovery. Through its endeavors, it aims to provide insights on further successful development and clinical application of tDCS in motor rehabilitation after TBI.

Background

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is defined as “an alteration in brain function (loss of consciousness, post-traumatic amnesia, and neurologic deficits) or other evidence of brain pathology (visual, neuroradiologic, or laboratory confirmation of damage to the brain) caused by external force” [1]. The incidence and prevalence of TBI are substantial and increasing in both developing and developed countries. TBI in older age groups due to falling has been on the rise in recent years, becoming the prevalent condition in all age groups [23]. TBI causes broad spectrum of impairments, including cognitive, psychological, sensory or motor impairments [45], which may increase the socioeconomic burdens and reduce the quality of life [67]. Although motor impairment, such as limb weakness, gait disturbance, balance problem, dystonia or spasticity, is less common than neurocognitive or behavioral problems after TBI, about 30% of TBI survivors have reported motor deficits that severely limited activities of daily living or participation [8].

Motor impairment after TBI is caused by both focal and diffuse damages, making it difficult to determine the precise anatomo-clinical correlations [910]. According to previous clinical studies, recovery after TBI also seems worse than that after stroke, although the neuroplasticity after TBI may also play an important role for recovery [11]. Therefore, a single unimodal approach for motor recovery, including conventional rehabilitation, may be limiting, and hence, requiring a novel therapeutic modality to improve the outcome after TBI.

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) – one of the noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) methods – can increase or decrease the cortical excitability according to polarity (anodal vs. cathodal) and be used to modulate the synaptic plasticity to promote long-term functional recovery via long-term depression or potentiation [1213]. Recent clinical trials evaluating patients with stroke have reported the potential benefits of tDCS for motor recovery [14]. Neuroplastic changes after TBI and results from animal studies also suggest that tDCS could improve the motor deficit in TBI, although clinical trials using tDCS for motor recovery in TBI are currently lacking [14].

In this review, we will cover (1) the pathophysiology and possible neuroplastic changes in TBI; (2) physiology of tDCS; (3) current clinical evidence of tDCS in TBI for motor recovery; (4) general current concept of tDCS application for motor recovery; and (5) the future developments and perspectives of tDCS for motor recovery after TBI. Although the scope of motor recovery is wide, this review will focus primarily on the recovery of limb function, especially that of the upper limb. We expect that this review can provide insights on further successful development and clinical application of tDCS in motor rehabilitation after TBI.[…]

 

Continue —> Transcranial direct current stimulation for the treatment of motor impairment following traumatic brain injury | Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation | Full Text

Fig. 3Schematic classification of personalized tDCS for motor recovery. Depending on electrode size, shape, and arrangement, tDCS can be broadly classified into a Conventional tDCS, b Customized Electrode tDCS, and c Distributed Array or High-Definition tDCS. Red color represents anodes and blue color represents cathodes

Fig. 5Merged system with tDCS and virtual reality. Patient with TBI can use this system in the hospital setting with the supervision of clinican (a) and can continue to use it at their home with tele-monitored system (b)

, , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

[ARTICLE] Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for improving capacity in activities and arm function after stroke: a network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials – Full Text

Abstract

Background

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) is an emerging approach for improving capacity in activities of daily living (ADL) and upper limb function after stroke. However, it remains unclear what type of tDCS stimulation is most effective. Our aim was to give an overview of the evidence network regarding the efficacy and safety of tDCS and to estimate the effectiveness of the different stimulation types.

Methods

We performed a systematic review of randomised trials using network meta-analysis (NMA), searching the following databases until 5 July 2016: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED, Web of Science, and four other databases. We included studies with adult people with stroke. We compared any kind of active tDCS (anodal, cathodal, or dual, that is applying anodal and cathodal tDCS concurrently) regarding improvement of our primary outcome of ADL capacity, versus control, after stroke. PROSPERO ID: CRD42016042055.

Results

We included 26 studies with 754 participants. Our NMA showed evidence of an effect of cathodal tDCS in improving our primary outcome, that of ADL capacity (standardized mean difference, SMD = 0.42; 95% CI 0.14 to 0.70). tDCS did not improve our secondary outcome, that of arm function, measured by the Fugl-Meyer upper extremity assessment (FM-UE). There was no difference in safety between tDCS and its control interventions, measured by the number of dropouts and adverse events.

Conclusion

Comparing different forms of tDCS shows that cathodal tDCS is the most promising treatment option to improve ADL capacity in people with stroke.

Background

An emerging approach for enhancing neural plasticity and hence rehabilitation outcomes after stroke is non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS). Several stimulation procedures are available, such as repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) [1], transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) [234], transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) [5], and transcranial pulsed ultrasound (TPU) [6]. In recent years a considerable evidence base for NIBS has emerged, especially for rTMS and tDCS.

tDCS is relatively inexpensive, easy to administer and portable, hence constituting an ideal adjuvant therapy during stroke rehabilitation. It works by applying a weak and constant direct current to the brain and has the ability to either enhance or suppress cortical excitability, with effect lasting up to several hours after the stimulation [789]. Hypothetically, this technique makes tDCS a potentially useful tool to modulate neuronal inhibitory and excitatory networks of the affected and the non-affected hemisphere post stroke to enhance, for example, upper limb motor recovery [1011]. Three different stimulation types can be distinguished.

  • In anodal stimulation, the anodal electrode (+) usually is placed over the lesioned brain area and the reference electrode over the contralateral orbit [12]. This leads to subthreshold depolarization, hence promoting neural excitation [3].

  • In cathodal stimulation, the cathode (−) usually is placed over the non-lesioned brain area and the reference electrode over the contralateral orbit [12], leading to subthreshold polarization and hence inhibiting neural activity [3].

  • Dual tDCS means the simultaneous application of anodal and cathodal stimulation [13].

However, the literature does not provide clear guidelines, not only regarding the tDCS type, but also regarding the electrode configuration [14], the amount of current applied and the duration of tDCS, or the question if tDCS should be applied as a standalone therapy or in combination with other treatments, like robot-assisted therapy [15].

Rationale

There is so far conflicting evidence from systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials on the effectiveness of different tDCS approaches after stroke. For example, over the past two decades more than 30 randomised clinical trials have investigated the effects of different tDCS stimulation techniques for stroke, and there are 55 ongoing trials [16]. However, the resulting network of evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating different types of tDCS (i.e., anodal, cathodal or dual) as well as their comparators like sham tDCS, physical rehabilitation or pharmacological agents has not yet been analyzed in a systematic review so far.

A network meta-analysis (NMA), also known as multiple treatment comparison meta-analysis or mixed treatment comparison analysis, allows for a quantitative synthesis of the evidence network. This is made possible by combining direct evidence from head-to-head comparisons of three or more interventions within randomised trials with indirect evidence across randomised trials on the basis of a common comparator [17181920]. Network meta-analysis has many advantages over traditional pairwise meta-analysis, such as visualizing and facilitating the interpretation of the wider picture of the evidence and improving understanding of the relative merits of these different types of neuromodulation when compared to sham tDCS and/or another comparator such as exercise therapy and/or pharmacological agents [2122]. By borrowing strength from indirect evidence to gain certainty about all treatment comparisons, network meta-analysis allows comparative effects that have not been investigated directly in randomised clinical trials to be estimated and ranked [2223].

Objective

The aim of our systematic review with NMA was to give an overview of the evidence network of randomised controlled trials of tDCS (anodal, cathodal, or dual) for improving capacity in activities of daily living (ADL) and upper limb function after stroke, as well as its safety, and to estimate and rank the relative effectiveness of the different stimulation types, while taking into account potentially important treatment effect modifiers.

Continue —>  Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for improving capacity in activities and arm function after stroke: a network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials | Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation | Full Text

 

Fig. 1 Study flow diagram

, , , , , ,

Leave a comment

[ARTICLE] Domiciliary VR-Based Therapy for Functional Recovery and Cortical Reorganization: Randomized Controlled Trial in Participants at the Chronic Stage Post Stroke – Full Text

ABSTRACT

Background: Most stroke survivors continue to experience motor impairments even after hospital discharge. Virtual reality-based techniques have shown potential for rehabilitative training of these motor impairments. Here we assess the impact of at-home VR-based motor training on functional motor recovery, corticospinal excitability and cortical reorganization.

Objective: The aim of this study was to identify the effects of home-based VR-based motor rehabilitation on (1) cortical reorganization, (2) corticospinal tract, and (3) functional recovery after stroke in comparison to home-based occupational therapy.

Methods: We conducted a parallel-group, controlled trial to compare the effectiveness of domiciliary VR-based therapy with occupational therapy in inducing motor recovery of the upper extremities. A total of 35 participants with chronic stroke underwent 3 weeks of home-based treatment. A group of subjects was trained using a VR-based system for motor rehabilitation, while the control group followed a conventional therapy. Motor function was evaluated at baseline, after the intervention, and at 12-weeks follow-up. In a subgroup of subjects, we used Navigated Brain Stimulation (NBS) procedures to measure the effect of the interventions on corticospinal excitability and cortical reorganization.

Results: Results from the system’s recordings and clinical evaluation showed significantly greater functional recovery for the experimental group when compared with the control group (1.53, SD 2.4 in Chedoke Arm and Hand Activity Inventory). However, functional improvements did not reach clinical significance. After the therapy, physiological measures obtained from a subgroup of subjects revealed an increased corticospinal excitability for distal muscles driven by the pathological hemisphere, that is, abductor pollicis brevis. We also observed a displacement of the centroid of the cortical map for each tested muscle in the damaged hemisphere, which strongly correlated with improvements in clinical scales.

Conclusions: These findings suggest that, in chronic stages, remote delivery of customized VR-based motor training promotes functional gains that are accompanied by neuroplastic changes.

Introduction

After initial hospitalization, many stroke patients return home relatively soon despite still suffering from impairments that require continuous rehabilitation [1]. Therefore, ¼ to ¾ of patients display persistent functional limitations for a period of 3 to 6 months after stroke [2]. Although clinicians may prescribe a home exercise regimen, reports indicate that only one-third of patients actually accomplish it [3]. Consequently, substantial gains in health-related quality of life during inpatient stroke rehabilitation may be followed by equally substantial declines in the 6 months after discharge [4]. Multiple studies have shown, however, that supported discharge combined with at home rehabilitation services does not compromise clinical inpatient outcomes [57] and may enhance recovery in subacute stroke patients [8]. Hence, it is essential that new approaches are deployed that help to manage chronic conditions associated with stroke, including domiciliary interventions [9] and the augmentation of current rehabilitation approaches in order to enhance their efficiency. There should be increased provision of home-based rehabilitation services for community-based adults following stroke, taking cost-effectiveness, and a quick family and social reintegration into account [10].

One of the latest approaches in rehabilitation science is based on the use of robotics and virtual reality (VR), which allow remote delivery of customized treatment by combining dedicated interface devices with automatized training scenarios [1012]. Several studies have tested the acceptability of VR-based setups as an intervention and evaluation tool for rehabilitation [1315]. One example of this technology is the, so called, Rehabilitation Gaming System (RGS) [16], which has been shown to be effective in the rehabilitation of the upper extremities in the acute and the chronic phases of stroke [13]. However, so far little work exists on the quantitative assessment of the clinical impact of VR based approaches and their effects on neural reorganization that can directly inform the design of these systems and their application in the domiciliary context. The main objective of this paper is to further explore the potential and limitations of VR technologies in domiciliary settings. Specifically, we examine the efficacy of a VR-based therapy when used at home for (1) assessing functional improvement, (2) facilitating functional recovery of the upper-limbs, and (3) inducing cortical reorganization. This is the first study testing the effects of VR-based therapy on cortical reorganization and corticospinal integrity using NBS.

Methods

Design

We conducted a parallel-group, controlled trial in order to compare the effectiveness of domiciliary VR-based therapy versus domiciliary occupational therapy (OT) in inducing functional recovery and cortical reorganization in chronic stroke patients.

Participants

Participants were first approached by an occupational therapist from the rehabilitation units of Hospital Esperanza and Hospital Vall d’Hebron from Barcelona to determine their interest in participating in a research project. Recruited participants met the following inclusion criteria: (1) mild-to-moderate upper-limbs hemiparesis (Proximal MRC>2) secondary to a first-ever stroke (>12 months post-stroke), (2) age between 45 and 85 years old, (3) absence of any major cognitive impairment (Mini-Mental State Evaluation, MMSE>22), and (4) previous experience with RGS in the clinic. The ethics committee of clinical research of the Parc de Salut Mar and Vall d’Hebron Research Institute approved the experimental guidelines. Thirty-nine participants at the chronic stage post-stroke were recruited for the study by two occupational therapists, between October 2011 and January 2012, and were assigned to a RGS (n=20) or a control group (n=19) using stratified permuted block randomization methods for balancing the participants’ demographics and clinical scores at baseline (Table 1). One participant in the RGS group refused to participate. Prior to the experiment, participants signed informed consent forms. This trial was not registered at or before the onset of participants’ enrollment because it is a pilot study that evaluates the feasibility of a prototype device. However, this study was registered retrospectively in ClinicalTrials.gov and has the identifier NCT02699398.

Instrumentation

Description of the Rehabilitation Gaming System

The RGS integrates a paradigm of goal-directed action execution and motor imagery [17], allowing the user to control a virtual body (avatar) through an image capture device (Figure 1). For this study, we developed training and evaluation scenarios within the RGS framework. In the Spheroids training scenario (Figure 1), the user has to perform bilateral reaching movements to intercept and grasp a maximum number of spheres moving towards him [16]. RGS captures only joint flexion and extension and filters out the participant’s trunk movements, therefore preventing the execution of compensatory body movements [18]. This task was defined by three difficulty parameters, each of them associated with a specific performance descriptor: (1) different trajectories of the spheres require different ranges of joint motion for elbow and shoulder, (2) the size of the spheres require different hand and grasp precision and perceptual abilities, and (3) the velocity of the spheres require different movement speeds and timing. All these parameters, also including the range of finger flexion and extension required to grasp and release spheroids, were dynamically modulated by the RGS Adaptive Difficulty Controller [19] to maintain the performance ratio (ie, successful trials over the total trials) above 0.6 and below 0.8, optimizing effort and reinforcement during training [20]. […]

Figure 1. Experimental setup and protocol: (A) Movements of the user’s upper limbs are captured and mapped onto an avatar displayed on a screen in first person perspective so that the user sees the movements of the virtual upper extremities. A pair of data gloves equipped with bend sensors captures finger flexion. (B) The Spheroids is divided into three subtasks: hit, grasp, and place. A white separator line divides the workspace in a paretic and non-paretic zone only allowing for ipsilateral movements.(C) The experimental protocol. Evaluation periods (Eval.) indicate clinical evaluations using standard clinical scales and Navigated Brain Stimulation procedures (NBS). These evaluations took place before the first session (W0), after the last session of the treatment (day 15, W3), and at follow-up (week 12, W12).

Continue —>  JSG-Domiciliary VR-Based Therapy for Functional Recovery and Cortical Reorganization: Randomized Controlled Trial in Participants at the Chronic Stage Post Stroke | Ballester | JMIR Serious Games

, , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

[ARTICLE] Electrical somatosensory stimulation followed by motor training of the paretic upper limb in acute stroke: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial | Trials – Full Text

Abstract

Background

Upper limb paresis is one of the most frequent and persistent impairments following stroke. Only 12–34% of stroke patients achieve full recovery of upper limb functioning, which seems to be required to habitually use the affected arm in daily tasks. Although the recovery of upper limb functioning is most pronounced during the first 4 weeks post stroke, there are few studies investigating the effect of rehabilitation during this critical time window. The purpose of this trial is to determine the effect of electrical somatosensory stimulation (ESS) initiated in the acute stroke phase on the recovery of upper limb functioning in a nonselected sample of stroke patients.

Methods/design

A sample of 102 patients with upper limb paresis of varying degrees of severity is assigned to either the intervention or the control group using stratified random sampling. The intervention group receives ESS plus usual rehabilitation and the control group receives sham ESS plus usual rehabilitation. The intervention is applied as 1 h of ESS/sham ESS daily, followed by motor training of the affected upper limb. The ESS/sham ESS treatment is initiated within 7 days from stroke onset and it is delivered during hospitalization, but no longer than 4 weeks post stroke. The primary outcome is hand dexterity assessed by the Box and Block Test; secondary outcomes are the Fugl-Meyer Assessment, hand grip strength, pinch strength, perceptual threshold of touch, degree of pain, and modified Rankin Scale score. Outcome measurements are conducted at baseline, post intervention and at 6-month follow-up.

Discussion

Because of the wide inclusion criteria, we believe that the results can be generalized to the larger population of patients with a first-ever stroke who present with an upper limb paresis of varying severity. On the other hand, the sample size (n = 102) may preclude subgroup analyses in such a heterogeneous sample. The sham ESS treatment totals a mere 2% of the active ESS treatment delivered to the intervention group per ESS session, and we consider that this dose is too small to induce a treatment effect.

Background

Stroke is ranked as the third largest cause of disease burden globally [1], causing substantial physical, psychological and financial demands on patients, families, and societies at large [2, 3, 4]. Upper limb paresis is one of the most frequent impairments following stroke and affects 48–77% of patients in the acute stroke phase [5, 6, 7]. Moreover, upper limb paresis has been identified as a major obstacle to regaining independence in activities of daily living (ADLs) [8]. In fact, only 12–34% of the patients achieve full functional recovery of the affected upper limb at 6 months post stroke [9, 10]. This represents a considerable challenge since near complete functional recovery is required to routinely involve the affected upper limb in performing ADLs [11].

Recovery of upper limb functioning is typically pronounced during the first month and subsequently levels off by 6 months post stroke [12, 13, 14]. Regaining hand dexterity (i.e., motor skills such as reaching, grasping, gripping, moving and releasing objects) is often achieved already within the first 4 weeks, implying that there may be a critical time window for recovery of upper limb functioning [9, 10] during which rehabilitation efforts may maximize functional recovery. However, there are few studies investigating the effect of motor rehabilitation methods in the initial weeks after stroke.

Electrical stimulation (ES) is one of the methods that have been used to facilitate recovery of upper limb functioning following stroke. ES can induce a muscle contraction, or it can be a somatosensory stimulation below the motor threshold [15]. The majority of studies using ES have been conducted in chronic stroke and, therefore, it remains unknown to what extent ES applied in the acute phase after stroke could affect the recovery of upper limb functioning. Also, these investigations have largely focused on ES that induces muscle contraction. In healthy persons, the application of low-intensity ES with no or small motor responses to peripheral hand nerves [16, 17, 18, 19, 20], forearm muscles [21] or the whole hand [22, 23] elicits an increase in the cortical excitability of the representations that control the stimulated body parts, which seems to outlast the stimulation period itself [18, 21, 23]. It has been hypothesized that increasing the amount of somatosensory input may enhance the motor recovery of patients following stroke [24]. Recent data on acute, subacute and mostly chronic stroke patients suggest that a single 2-h session of ESS to the peripheral hand nerves leads to transient improvement of pinch force, movement kinematics and upper limb motor skills required for ADL performance [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31]. However, ESS was only used in conjunction with motor training in one of these studies [29]. Interestingly, there is some evidence that multiple sessions of ESS to the peripheral hand nerves, in conjunction with motor training, might improve motor skills of the paretic upper limb in subacute [32, 33] and chronic stroke patients [34], and, moreover, that these positive results seems to be long lasting [34]. However, the effect of ESS in conjunction with motor training has never been investigated in acute stroke patients. It is noteworthy that ESS is benign in nature, causes patients minimal discomfort and adverse effects (itch and blushing), is relatively inexpensive and can easily be incorporated into clinical practice [35]. Therefore, it would be valuable to establish the effect of multiple sessions of ESS in conjunction with motor training in the restoration of upper limb functioning in the acute stroke phase.

The purpose of the present trial is to investigate the effect of multiple sessions of ESS treatment accompanied by motor training on the recovery of the affected upper limb following stroke. The ESS treatment is initiated in the acute stroke phase and each ESS session is immediately followed by motor training of the paretic upper limb. Specifically, we wish to address the following:

  1. (1)

    Does ESS treatment: (a) reduce motor and sensory impairments, (b) improve hand dexterity and (c) reduce disability at the end of the intervention period (short-term effect)?

  2. (2)

    Are the changes that can be observed at the end of the intervention period still present or improved at 6 months post stroke (long-term effect)?

Our hypothesis is that ESS treatment initiated in the acute stroke phase will improve paretic upper limb functioning as measured by the Box and Block Test (BBT) (primary outcome measure) at 6 months post stroke.

Continue —> Electrical somatosensory stimulation followed by motor training of the paretic upper limb in acute stroke: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial | Trials | Full Text

Fig. 2 Placement of the electrodes

, , , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

[ARTICLE] Factors Associated With Upper Extremity Functional Recovery Following Low-Frequency Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Stroke Patients – Full Text HTML

Abstract

Objective: To investigate the factors related to upper extremity functional improvement following inhibitory repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in stroke patients.

Methods: Forty-one stroke patients received low-frequency rTMS over the contralesional hemisphere according to a standard protocol, in addition to conventional physical and occupational therapy. The rTMS-treated patients were divided into two groups according to their responsiveness to rTMS measured by the self-care score of the Korean version of Modified Barthel Index (K-MBI): responded group (n=19) and non-responded group (n=22). Forty-one age-matched stroke patients who had not received rTMS served as controls. Neurological, cognitive and functional assessments were performed before rTMS and 4 weeks after rTMS treatment.

Results: Among the rTMS-treated patients, the responded group was significantly younger than the non-responded group (51.6±10.5 years and 65.5±13.7 years, respectively; p=0.001). Four weeks after rTMS, the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale, the Brunnstrom recovery stage and upper extremity muscle power scores were significantly more improved in the responded group than in the control group. Besides the self-care score, the mobility score of the K-MBI was also more improved in the responded group than in the non-responded group or controls.

Conclusion: Age is the most obvious factor determining upper extremity functional responsiveness to low-frequency rTMS in stroke patients.

Continue —>  KoreaMed Synapse

Fig. 1. Age distribution of controls and rTMS-treated stroke patients. rTMS, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation; NR, non-responding stroke patients; R, responding stroke patients.

, , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

[ARTICLE] The Control of Movement Following Traumatic Brain Injury – Full Text HTML/PDF

Abstract

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) results in a variety of impairments in cognition, mood, sensation, and movement, depending upon the location and severity of injury. Although not as extensively studied as cognitive impairments, motor impairments are common, especially in moderately to severely injured patients. The recovery of these deficits is not usually complete; however, extensive effort is put into the rehabilitation of motor skills to enhance independence and quality of life. Understanding the motor recovery process and how it can be influenced by rehabilitation has been extensively studied in animal models of stroke and focal lesions, albeit to a lesser extent following animal models of TBI. Injury-induced neural plasticity is intricately involved in motor recovery and influenced by behavioral compensation and rehabilitation following stroke and focal lesions. New studies in animal models of TBI indicate that neural plasticity and the processes of motor recovery and rehabilitation following brain injury may not mirror those processes shown to occur following stroke. Further examination of motor recovery, rehabilitation, and plasticity in animal models of TBI as well as in individuals with TBI will be necessary to fully understand the control of movement following brain injury. © 2013 American Physiological Society. Compr Physiol 3:121-139, 2013.

View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (4478K)

via The Control of Movement Following Traumatic Brain Injury – Comprehensive Physiology – Kozlowski – Wiley Online Library.

, , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

[ARTICLE] The Role of Task-Specific Training in Rehabilitation Therapies

…Task-oriented therapy is important. It makes intuitive sense that the best way to relearn a given task is to train specifically for that task. In animals, functional reorganization is greater for tasks that are meaningful to the animal. Repetition alone, without usefulness or meaning in terms of function, is not enough to produce increased motor cortical representations. In humans, less intense but task-specific training regimens with the more affected limb can produce cortical reorganization and associated, meaningful functional improvements…

via Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation – online access – Volume 12 – Number 3/Summer 2005 – Animal and Clinical Research in Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation – The Role of Task-Specific Training in Rehabilitation Therapies.

, , , , , ,

Leave a comment

ARTICLE: Effects of a Mirror-Induced Visual Illusion on a Reaching Task in Stroke Patients

Abstract

Background. Although most mirror therapy studies have shown improved motor performance in stroke patients, the optimal mirror training protocol still remains unclear. Objective. To study the relative contribution of a mirror in training a reaching task and of unilateral and bimanual training with a mirror. Methods. A total of 93 stroke patients at least 6 months poststroke were instructed to perform a reaching task as fast and as fluently as possible. They performed 70 practice trials after being randomly allocated to 1 of 5 experimental groups: training with (1) the paretic arm with direct view (Paretic-No Mirror), (2) the nonparetic arm with direct view (Nonparetic-No Mirror), (3) the nonparetic arm with mirror reflection (Nonparetic Mirror), (4) both sides and with a nontransparent screen preventing visual control of paretic side (Bilateral-Screen), and (5) both sides with mirror reflection of the nonparetic arm (Bilateral-Mirror). As baseline and follow-up, patients performed 6 trials using only their paretic side. Primary outcome measure was the movement time. Results. We found the largest intervention effect in the Paretic-No Mirror condition. However, the Nonparetic-Mirror condition was not significantly different from the Paretic-No Mirror condition, while the Unaffected-No Mirror condition had significantly less improvement than the Paretic-No Mirror condition. In addition, movement time improved significantly less in the bimanual conditions and there was no difference between both bimanual conditions or between both mirror conditions. Conclusion. The present study confirms that using a mirror reflection can facilitate motor learning. In this task, bimanual movement using mirror training was less effective than unilateral training.

via Effects of a Mirror-Induced Visual Illusion on a Reaching Task in Stroke Patients.

, , ,

Leave a comment

%d bloggers like this: