| Literature DB >> 34072939 |
Paulina Magdalena Ostrowska1, Maciej Śliwiński1, Rafał Studnicki1, Rita Hansdorfer-Korzon1.
Abstract
(1) Background: Due to the pandemic caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, rehabilitation centres have become less available for neurological patients. This is the result of efforts to physically distance society, to try to slow the spread of the pathogen. Health care facilities were mainly restricted to urgent cases, while most physiotherapy treatments, mainly for patients with chronic conditions, were suspended. Some countries have seen a reduction in acute stroke hospital admissions of from 50% to 80%. One solution to the above problem is the use of telerehabilitation in the home environment as an alternative to inpatient rehabilitation. (2) Aim of the study: The purpose of this review is to analyse the benefits and limitations of teletherapy in relation to the functional condition of post-stroke patients. (3)Entities:
Keywords: Covid-19; post-stroke rehabilitation; stroke; telerehabilitation; virtual reality
Year: 2021 PMID: 34072939 PMCID: PMC8229171 DOI: 10.3390/healthcare9060654
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Healthcare (Basel) ISSN: 2227-9032
Figure 1Flow diagram adapted from PRISMA which shows the process for identifying and screening the articles for inclusion and exclusion.
Description of articles initially included by PRISMA methodology.
| Article Type | Focus | Reference |
|---|---|---|
| RCT with published results |
Home-based TR for adults after stroke Collaborative care model based TR for acute stroke patients TR to improve balance in stroke patients | Cramer S. et al., 2019 |
| RCT without published results |
Home-based VR rehabilitation after stroke | Sheehy L. et al., 2019 |
| Case study |
User acceptance of a home-based stroke TR Video home-based TR for stroke survivors | Chen Y. et al., 2020 |
| Other trials (not randomized and/ or not controlled) |
Correlation of social network structure and home-based TR after stroke TR aimed at increasing cardiorespiratory fitness for people after stroke TR using to improve cognitive function in post-stroke survivors Connecting stroke survivors and therapists using technology | Podury A. et al., 2021 |
Inclusion and exclusion criteria for patients enrolled in the study program [15].
|
Age ≥ 18 years Past stroke (usually with time of stroke onset 4–36 weeks prior to study program) Box and Block Test results of directly involved upper limb ≥ 3 blocks in 60 s FM-A score of 22–56/ 66 points Ability to transfer independently from sitting to standing The presence of a caregiver while doing movement tasks |
|
Diagnosis (apart from the index stroke) significantly affecting the function of the upper or lower limb directly involved A major, active, coexistent neurological or psychiatric disease (including dementia) A medical disorder that substantially reduces the likelihood that a subject will be able to comply with all study procedures Complete aphasia Severe depression, defined as Geriatric Depression Scale Score > 10/15 Significant cognitive impairment, defined as Montreal Cognitive Assessment score < 22/30 Deficits in communication that interfere with reasonable study participation Lacking visual acuity, with or without corrective lens, of 20/40 or better in at least one eye Receipt of Botox to arms, legs or trunk in the preceding 6 months, or expectation that Botox will be administered to the arm, leg or trunk prior to study program Unable or unwilling to perform study procedures/ therapy, or expectation of noncompliance with study procedures/ therapy Pregnancy |
Scores of scales and functional tests before-post telerehabilitation [3,16].
| Post-Pre Assessment Average | Experimental Group (EG) | Control Group (CG) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| TUG (seconds) | −0.1 (−1.8, 1.6) | −1.4 (−3.7, 1) | 0.326 |
| TUG + cognitive task (seconds) | −1.7 (−4.2, 0.7) | −3.4 (−5.7, −1.1) | 0.004 |
| FTSST (seconds) | −3 (−5.8, −0.2) | −2 (−4.1, 0.2) | 0.006 |
| BBS (/56) | −0.5 (−4.2, 3.3) | 0.6 (−0,5, 1.6) | 0.959 |
| CB&M (/96) | 5.6 (−5, 16.2) | 6.1 (1.6, 10.7) | 0.049 |
| SIS (/295) | 7.7 (−2.1, 17.6) | 13.8 (2.2, 25.3) | 0.006 |
Changes in scores of functional condition and motor control abilities after 4, 8 and 12 weeks of telerehabilitation [32].
| Intervention Group | Control Group | RM-ANOVA | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline | 4 Weeks | 8 Weeks | 12 Weeks | Baseline | 4 Weeks | 8 Weeks | 12 Weeks | F (Time*Group) |
| |
| FM(UE) | 11.93 ± 2.50 | 35.90 ± 2.78 | 49.10 ± 3.00 | 55.33 ± 2.81 | 2.61 ± 1.78 | 29.35 ± 2.36 | 39.35 ± 4.13 | 47.42 ± 3.90 | 42.523 | <0.001 |
| FM(LE) | 13.37 ± 1.38 | 23.87 ± 1.28 | 25.50 ± 1.74 | 28.37 ± 2.51 | 14.13 ± 1.43 | 20.84 ± 1.39 | 24.23 ± 1.86 | 27.87 ± 1.73 | 57.000 | <0.001 |
| BBS | 21.07 ± 3.29 | 30.50 ± 2.84 | 38.13 ± 2.84 | 43.13 ± 2.32 | 20.87 ± 2.33 | 28.06 ± 2.28 | 34.19 ± 2.15 | 38.29 ± 2.70 | 9.205 | <0.001 |
| TUG | 41.93 ± 3.57 | 30.37 ± 3.62 | 22.73 ± 2.49 | 19.50 ± 2.73 | 40.58 ± 4.40 | 34.23 ± 2.86 | 27.13 ± 2.50 | 23.97 ± 3.35 | 16.320 | <0.001 |
| 6MWT | 91.73 ± 7.46 | 111.50 ± 8.12 | 128.90 ± 7.42 | 141.63 ± 8.68 | 92.35 ± 6.15 | 107.94 ± 5.14 | 123.13 ± 5.71 | 129.45 ± 7.06 | 10.530 | <0.001 |
Note: F—time effect group (time factor * grouping factor).
Description of RCT included by PRISMA methodology in this review.
| Authors/Year | Participants | Intervention | Outcomes Measurement | Results |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cramer S. et al., 2019 | Experimental and control group received 18 supervised and 18 unsupervised 70-min sessions. | FMA-UE (Fugl-Meyer Assessment upper extremity) | Both groups showed significant treatment-related motor gains, with a mean (SD) unadjusted FM score change from baseline to 30 days after therapy of 8.36 (7.04) points in the control group ( | |
| Wu Z. et al., 2020 | Patients in the intervention group received home remote rehabilitation based on a collaborative care model. A collaborative care team consisting of neurologists, nurses, rehabilitation therapists, counselors and caregivers was established. Rehabilitation therapists assess the extent of patient dysfunction and work with family caregivers to develop rehabilitation plans and goals. The home remote rehabilitation guidance uses the Internet-based TCMeeting v6.0 video conferencing system. | FMA-total (Fugl-Meyer Assessment total) | See | |
| Burgos P. et al., 2020 | Both groups received their standard rehabilitation treatment at the hospital site (3 sessions of 40 min per week of physical therapy for 4 weeks). | BBS (Berg Balance Scale). | Balance results improved in the BBS, with mean values of PRE = 35 ± 4.42 (62.50% ± 7.91), POST = 46.33 ± 3.01 (82.67% ± 5.37), and MBT PRE = 10.33 ± 2.87 (36.89% ± 10.26), and POST = 18.67 ± 2.81 (66.67% ± 10.01) with a statistically significant variation within PRE and POST (F(1/5) = 60.84, |
Figure 2Advantages of telerehabilitation.