4.6 Review

Robot-Assisted Therapy for Upper Extremity Motor Impairment After Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

期刊

PHYSICAL THERAPY
卷 101, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/ptj/pzab010

关键词

Stroke; Upper Extremity; Unilateral; Bilateral Robot-Assisted Therapy; Meta-Analysis; Randomized Controlled Trial

资金

  1. Central Guide to Local Science and Technology Development [2018 L3009]
  2. Science and Technology Platform Construction Project of the Fujian Science and Technology Department [2015Y2001-40]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Robot-assisted therapy may be more effective than conventional rehabilitation, particularly for individuals after stroke with significant upper extremity hemiplegia and limited potential for spontaneous recovery.
Objective. The purpose of this study was to review the effects of robot-assisted therapy (RT) for improving poststroke upper extremity motor impairment. Methods. The PubMed, Embase, Medline, and Web of Science databases were searched from inception to April 8, 2020. Randomized controlled trials that were conducted to evaluate the effects of RT on upper extremity motor impairment poststroke and that used Fugl-Meyer assessment for upper extremity scores as an outcome were included. Two authors independently screened articles, extracted data, and assessed the methodological quality of the included studies using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed to pool the effect sizes across the studies. Results. Forty-one randomized controlled trials with 1916 stroke patients were included. Compared with dose-matched conventional rehabilitation, RT significantly improved the Fugl-Meyer assessment for upper extremity scores of the patients with stroke, with a small effect size (Hedges g = 0.25; 95% CI, 0.11-0.38; I-2 = 45.9%). The subgroup analysis revealed that the effects of unilateral RT, but not that of bilateral RT, were superior to conventional rehabilitation (Hedges g = 0.32; 95% CI, 0.15-0.50; I-2 = 55.9%). Regarding the type of robot devices, the effects of the end effector device (Hedges g = 0.22; 95% CI, 0.09-0.36; I-2 = 35.4%), but not the exoskeleton device, were superior to conventional rehabilitation. Regarding the stroke stage, the between-group difference (ie, RT vs convention rehabilitation) was significant only for people with late subacute or chronic stroke (Hedges g = 0.33; 95% CI, 0.16-0.50; I-2 = 34.2%). Conclusion. RT might be superior to conventional rehabilitation in improving upper extremity motor impairment in people after stroke with notable upper extremity hemiplegia and limited potential for spontaneous recovery.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据