Limited evidence of physical therapy on balance after stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2019
2019
Historique:
received:
11
03
2019
accepted:
13
08
2019
entrez:
30
8
2019
pubmed:
30
8
2019
medline:
5
3
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Stroke results in balance disorders and these directly affect autonomy and quality of life. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the efficacy of physical therapy (PT) on balance and postural control after stroke. We included all randomized controlled trials assessing the efficacy of PT on balance and postural control in adult patients after stroke without language restriction. Medline, Embase/Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PEDro, Pascal, and Francis databases were searched until January 2019. Primary outcomes were balance (Berg Balance scale and Postural Assessment Scale for Stroke) and postural control with postural deviation or stability measurement in sitting or standing static evaluation. A pair of independent reviewers selected studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Meta-analyses with subgroups (categories of PT, time post-stroke, and lesion location) and meta-regression (duration of PT) were conducted. A total of 145 studies (n = 5912) were selected from the 13,123 records identified. For balance, evidence was found in favor of the efficacy of functional task-training alone (standardized mean difference 0.39, 95% confidence interval [0.09; 0.68], heterogeneity I2 = 63%) or associated with musculoskeletal intervention and/or cardiopulmonary intervention (0.37, [0.19; 0.55], I2 = 48%), electrostimulation (0.91, [0.49; 1.34], I2 = 52%) immediately after intervention, compared to sham treatment or usual care (ST/UC). For postural deviation eyes open, assistive devices were more effective than no treatment (-0.21, [-0.37; -0.05], I2 = 0%) immediately after intervention; for postural stability eyes open, functional task-training and sensory interventions were more effective than ST/UC (0.97, [0.35; 1.59], I2 = 65% and 0.80, [0.46; 1.13], I2 = 37% respectively) immediately after intervention. Functional task-training associated with musculoskeletal intervention and/or cardiopulmonary intervention and sensory interventions seem to be immediately effective in improving balance and postural stability, respectively. The heterogeneity of PT and the weak methodological quality of studies limited the interpretation and the confidence in findings.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Stroke results in balance disorders and these directly affect autonomy and quality of life. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the efficacy of physical therapy (PT) on balance and postural control after stroke.
METHODS
We included all randomized controlled trials assessing the efficacy of PT on balance and postural control in adult patients after stroke without language restriction. Medline, Embase/Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PEDro, Pascal, and Francis databases were searched until January 2019. Primary outcomes were balance (Berg Balance scale and Postural Assessment Scale for Stroke) and postural control with postural deviation or stability measurement in sitting or standing static evaluation. A pair of independent reviewers selected studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Meta-analyses with subgroups (categories of PT, time post-stroke, and lesion location) and meta-regression (duration of PT) were conducted.
RESULTS
A total of 145 studies (n = 5912) were selected from the 13,123 records identified. For balance, evidence was found in favor of the efficacy of functional task-training alone (standardized mean difference 0.39, 95% confidence interval [0.09; 0.68], heterogeneity I2 = 63%) or associated with musculoskeletal intervention and/or cardiopulmonary intervention (0.37, [0.19; 0.55], I2 = 48%), electrostimulation (0.91, [0.49; 1.34], I2 = 52%) immediately after intervention, compared to sham treatment or usual care (ST/UC). For postural deviation eyes open, assistive devices were more effective than no treatment (-0.21, [-0.37; -0.05], I2 = 0%) immediately after intervention; for postural stability eyes open, functional task-training and sensory interventions were more effective than ST/UC (0.97, [0.35; 1.59], I2 = 65% and 0.80, [0.46; 1.13], I2 = 37% respectively) immediately after intervention.
CONCLUSIONS
Functional task-training associated with musculoskeletal intervention and/or cardiopulmonary intervention and sensory interventions seem to be immediately effective in improving balance and postural stability, respectively. The heterogeneity of PT and the weak methodological quality of studies limited the interpretation and the confidence in findings.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31465462
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0221700
pii: PONE-D-19-06208
pmc: PMC6715189
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0221700Subventions
Organisme : World Health Organization
ID : 001
Pays : International
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2000 Mar;81(3):364-7
pubmed: 10724084
Bull World Health Organ. 1976;54(5):541-53
pubmed: 1088404
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004 Feb;85(2):268-73
pubmed: 14966712
Gait Posture. 2005 Nov;22(3):267-81
pubmed: 16214666
Phys Ther. 2006 Jan;86(1):30-8
pubmed: 16386060
Stat Med. 2007 Nov 10;26(25):4544-62
pubmed: 17476644
J Rehabil Med. 2008 Jan;40(1):23-7
pubmed: 18176733
Stroke. 2008 Jun;39(6):1793-9
pubmed: 18369174
PLoS Med. 2009 Jul 21;6(7):e1000097
pubmed: 19621072
Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2010 Jun;112(5):406-12
pubmed: 20227176
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2010 Oct;91(10):1582-6
pubmed: 20875518
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Jan 19;(1):CD008186
pubmed: 21249701
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Nov 09;(11):CD003316
pubmed: 22071806
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2012 Jun;93(6):1101-7
pubmed: 22502804
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1990 May;71(6):365-71
pubmed: 2334276
BMJ. 2013 Apr 24;346:f2304
pubmed: 23616031
Top Stroke Rehabil. 2013 Jul-Aug;20(4):340-6
pubmed: 23893833
Evid Based Ment Health. 2014 Feb;17(1):30
pubmed: 24477535
PLoS One. 2014 Feb 04;9(2):e87987
pubmed: 24505342
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Apr 22;(4):CD001920
pubmed: 24756870
Brain Inj. 2014;28(8):1109-14
pubmed: 24892221
Stat Med. 2015 Jan 30;34(2):343-60
pubmed: 25363575
Top Stroke Rehabil. 2015 Feb;22(1):63-71
pubmed: 25776122
Disabil Rehabil. 2016;38(3):245-9
pubmed: 25856203
Top Stroke Rehabil. 2015 Jun;22(3):161-8
pubmed: 26084320
BMJ Open. 2015 Sep 03;5(9):e008562
pubmed: 26338841
Clin Med (Lond). 2015 Oct;15(5):461-4
pubmed: 26430186
Ann Phys Rehabil Med. 2016 Apr;59(2):114-24
pubmed: 26969343
Stroke. 2016 Jun;47(6):e98-e169
pubmed: 27145936
Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2017 Jan;96(1):34-44
pubmed: 27149591
J Clin Epidemiol. 2016 Dec;80:25-33
pubmed: 27502970
Stroke. 2016 Oct;47(10):2603-10
pubmed: 27633021
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Dec 21;12:CD011058
pubmed: 28002636
BMJ Open. 2017 Jan 30;7(1):e013348
pubmed: 28137928
Circ Res. 2017 Feb 3;120(3):439-448
pubmed: 28154096
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Jun 02;6:CD007513
pubmed: 28573757
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2017 Dec;98(12):2393-2398
pubmed: 28583466
Int J Stroke. 2017 Jul;12(5):472-479
pubmed: 28697706
Complement Ther Clin Pract. 2017 Aug;28:75-84
pubmed: 28779941
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2018 Mar;99(3):563-573.e5
pubmed: 28797618
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2018 Sep;99(9):1876-1889
pubmed: 29056502
J Rehabil Med. 2018 Jan 10;50(1):37-44
pubmed: 29068037
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Nov 20;11:CD008349
pubmed: 29156493
Syst Rev. 2017 Dec 06;6(1):245
pubmed: 29208034
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Dec 08;12:CD011483
pubmed: 29220541
Clin Rehabil. 2018 Sep;32(9):1203-1219
pubmed: 29232981
Clin Rehabil. 2018 May;32(5):583-593
pubmed: 29243508
Exp Brain Res. 1985;61(1):21-37
pubmed: 4085597
Biometrics. 1977 Mar;33(1):159-74
pubmed: 843571
Scand J Rehabil Med. 1997 Mar;29(1):11-6
pubmed: 9084100
Lancet. 1997 Aug 2;350(9074):326-9
pubmed: 9251637
Scand J Rehabil Med. 1998 Mar;30(1):9-14
pubmed: 9526749