Robot-Assisted Arm Training versus Therapist-Mediated Training after Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT: Background:More than two-thirds of stroke patients have arm motor impairments and function deficits on hospital admission, leading to diminished quality of life and reduced social participation. Robot-assisted training (RAT) is a promising rehabilitation program for upper extremity while its effect is still controversial due to heterogeneity in clinical trials. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare robot-assisted training (RAT) versus therapist-mediated training (TMT) for arm rehabilitation after stroke. Methods:We searched the following electronic databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane EBM Reviews, and Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro). Studies of moderate or high methodological quality (PEDro score ?4) were included and analyzed. We assessed the effects of RAT versus TMT for arm rehabilitation after stroke with testing the noninferiority of RAT. A small effect size of -2 score for mean difference in Fugl-Meyer Assessment of the Upper Extremity (FMA-UE) and Cohen's d?=?-0.2 for standardized mean difference (SMD) were set as noninferiority margin. Results:Thirty-five trials with 2241 participants met inclusion criteria. The effect size for arm motor impairment, capacity, activities of daily living, and social participation were 0.763 (WMD, 95% CI: 0.404 to 1.123), 0.109 (SMD, 95% CI: -0.066 to 0.284), 0.049 (SMD, 95% CI: -0.055 to 0.17), and -0.061 (SMD, 95% CI: -0.196 to 0.075), respectively. Conclusion:This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrated that robot-assisted training was slightly superior in motor impairment recovery and noninferior to therapist-mediated training in improving arm capacity, activities of daily living, and social participation, which supported the use of RAT in clinical practice.

SUBMITTER: Chen Z 

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7641296 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature