Literature DB >> 18843735

Electromechanical and robot-assisted arm training for improving arm function and activities of daily living after stroke.

Jan Mehrholz1, Thomas Platz, Joachim Kugler, Marcus Pohl.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Electromechanical and robot-assisted arm training devices are used in rehabilitation and might help to improve arm function after stroke.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of electromechanical and robot-assisted arm training for improving activities of daily living and arm function and motor strength of patients after stroke, and the acceptability and safety of the therapy. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched October 2007), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library, Issue 3, 2007), MEDLINE (1950 to October 2007), EMBASE (1980 to October 2007), CINAHL (1982 to October 2007), AMED (1985 to October 2007), SPORTDiscus (1949 to October 2007), PEDro (searched October 2007), COMPENDEX (1972 to October 2007) and INSPEC (1969 to October 2007). We also handsearched relevant conference proceedings, searched trials and research registers, checked reference lists, and contacted trialists, experts and researchers in our field, and manufacturers of commercial devices. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing electromechanical and robot-assisted arm training for recovery of arm function with other rehabilitation interventions or no treatment for patients after stroke. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, assessed trial quality and extracted data. We contacted trialists for additional information. We analysed the results as standardised mean differences (SMDs) for continuous variables and relative risk differences (RD) for dichotomous variables. MAIN
RESULTS: We included 11 trials (328 participants) in this review. Electromechanical and robot-assisted arm training did not improve activities of daily living (SMD = 0.29; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.47 to 1.06; P = 0.45; I(2 )= 85%). Arm motor function and arm motor strength improved (SMD = 0.68, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.11; P = 0.002; I(2 )= 56% and SMD = 01.03, 95% CI 0.29 to 1.78; P = 0.007; I(2 )= 79% respectively). Electromechanical and robot-assisted arm training did not increase the risk of patients to drop out (RD) (fixed-effect model) = 0.01; 95% CI -0.05 to 0.06; P = 0.77; I(2 )= 0.0%) and adverse events were rare. AUTHORS'
CONCLUSIONS: Patients who receive electromechanical and robot-assisted arm training after stroke are not more likely to improve their activities of daily living, but arm motor function and strength of the paretic arm may improve. However, the results must be interpreted with caution because there were variations between the trials in the duration, amount of training and type of treatment, and in the patient characteristics.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18843735     DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006876.pub2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev        ISSN: 1361-6137


  58 in total

1.  Single degree-of-freedom exoskeleton mechanism design for finger rehabilitation.

Authors:  Eric T Wolbrecht; David J Reinkensmeyer; Alba Perez-Gracia
Journal:  IEEE Int Conf Rehabil Robot       Date:  2011

2.  A comparison of motor adaptations to robotically facilitated upper extremity task practice demonstrated by children with cerebral palsy and adults with stroke.

Authors:  Qinyin Qiu; Sergei Adamovich; Soha Saleh; Ian Lafond; Alma S Merians; Gerard G Fluet
Journal:  IEEE Int Conf Rehabil Robot       Date:  2011

Review 3.  Home-based therapy programmes for upper limb functional recovery following stroke.

Authors:  Fiona Coupar; Alex Pollock; Lynn A Legg; Catherine Sackley; Paulette van Vliet
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2012-05-16

4.  Toward Restoration of Normal Mechanics of Functional Hand Tasks Post-Stroke: Subject-Specific Approach to Reinforce Impaired Muscle Function.

Authors:  Billy C Vermillion; Alexander W Dromerick; Sang Wook Lee
Journal:  IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng       Date:  2019-06-20       Impact factor: 3.802

Review 5.  Robotics in shoulder rehabilitation.

Authors:  Chiara Sicuri; Giuseppe Porcellini; Giovanni Merolla
Journal:  Muscles Ligaments Tendons J       Date:  2014-07-14

6.  Cortical effects of repetitive finger flexion- vs. extension-resisted tracking movements: a TMS study.

Authors:  Sasha B Godfrey; Peter S Lum; Evan Chan; Michelle L Harris-Love
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2012-11-21       Impact factor: 2.714

Review 7.  The promise of mHealth: daily activity monitoring and outcome assessments by wearable sensors.

Authors:  Bruce H Dobkin; Andrew Dorsch
Journal:  Neurorehabil Neural Repair       Date:  2011 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.919

Review 8.  Mental practice for treating upper extremity deficits in individuals with hemiparesis after stroke.

Authors:  Ruth E Barclay-Goddard; Ted J Stevenson; William Poluha; Leyda Thalman
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2011-05-11

9.  Controlling pre-movement sensorimotor rhythm can improve finger extension after stroke.

Authors:  S L Norman; D J McFarland; A Miner; S C Cramer; E T Wolbrecht; J R Wolpaw; D J Reinkensmeyer
Journal:  J Neural Eng       Date:  2018-07-31       Impact factor: 5.379

10.  Effects of intensive arm training with the rehabilitation robot ARMin II in chronic stroke patients: four single-cases.

Authors:  Patricia Staubli; Tobias Nef; Verena Klamroth-Marganska; Robert Riener
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2009-12-17       Impact factor: 4.262

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.