Objective. The aim of this exploratory pilot study is to test the effects of bilateral tDCS combined with upper extremity robot-assisted therapy (RAT) on stroke survivors.Methods. We enrolled 23 subjects who were allocated to 2 groups: RAT + real tDCS and RAT + sham-tDCS. Each patient underwent 10 sessions (5 sessions/week) over two weeks. Outcome measures were collected before and after treatment: (i) Fugl-Meyer Assessment-Upper Extremity (FMA-UE), (ii) Box and Block Test (BBT), and (iii) Motor Activity Log (MAL).Results. Both groups reported a significant improvement in FMA-UE score after treatment (p<0.01). No significant between-groups differences were found in motor function. However, when the analysis was adjusted for stroke type and duration, a significant interaction effect (p<0.05) was detected, showing that stroke duration (acute versus chronic) and type (cortical versus subcortical) modify the effect of tDCS and robotics on motor function. Patients with chronic and subcortical stroke benefited more from the treatments than patients with acute and cortical stroke, who presented very small changes.Conclusion. The additional use of bilateral tDCS to RAT seems to have a significant beneficial effect depending on the duration and type of stroke. These results should be verified by additional confirmatory studies.

Systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses are essential resources for the clinicians. They allow to evaluate the strengths and the weaknesses of the evidence to support clinical decision-making if they are adequately reported. Little is known in the rehabilitation field about the completeness of reporting of SRs and its relationship with the risk of bias (ROB). Primary: 1) To evaluate the completeness of reporting of systematic reviews (SRs) published in rehabilitation journals by evaluating their adherence to the PRISMA 2009 checklist, 2) To investigate the relationship between ROB and completeness of reporting. Secondary: To study the association between completeness of reporting and journals and study characteristics. A random sample of 200 SRs published between 2011 and 2020 in 68 rehabilitation journals was indexed under the “rehabilitation” category in the InCites database. Two independent reviewers evaluated adherence to the PRISMA checklist and assessed ROB using the ROBIS tool. Overall adherence and adherence to each PRISMA item and section were calculated. Regression analyses investigated the association between completeness of reporting, ROB, and other characteristics (impact factor, publication options, publication year, and study protocol registration). The mean overall PRISMA adherence across the 200 studies considered was 61.4%. Regression analyses show that having a high overall ROB is a significant predictor of lower adherence (B=-7.1%; 95%CI -12.1, -2.0). Studies published in fourth quartile journals displayed a lower overall adherence (B= -7.2%; 95%CI -13.2, -1.3) than those published in first quartile journals; the overall adherence increased (B= 11.9%; 95%CI 5.9, 18.0) if the SR protocol was registered. No association between adherence, publication options, and publication year was found. Reporting completeness in rehabilitation SRs is suboptimal and is associated with ROB, impact factor, and study registration. Authors of SRs should improve adherence to the PRISMA guideline, and journal editors should implement strategies to optimize the completeness of reporting.

To develop a screening tool for pelvic floor dysfunction (PFD) in female athletes for use by sports medicine clinicians (eg, musculoskeletal/sports physiotherapists, sports and exercise medicine physicians), which guides referral to a PFD specialist (eg, pelvic floor/women’s health physiotherapist, gynaecologist, urogynaecologist, urologist).Between February and April 2022, an international two-round modified Delphi study was conducted to assess expert opinion on which symptoms, risk factors and clinical and sports-related characteristics (items) should be included in a screening tool. We defined consensus a priori as >67% response agreement to pass each round.41 and 34 experts participated in rounds 1 and 2, respectively. Overall, seven general statements were endorsed as relevant by most participants highlighting the importance of screening for PFD in female athletes. Through consensus, the panel developed the Pelvic Floor Dysfunction-ScrEeNing Tool IN fEmale athLetes (PFD-SENTINEL) and agreed to a cluster of PFD symptoms (n=5) and items (risk factors, clinical and sports-related characteristics; n=28) that should prompt specialist care. A clinical algorithm was also created: a direct referral is recommended when at least one symptom or 14 items are reported. If these thresholds are not reached, continuous monitoring of the athlete’s health is indicated.Despite increasing awareness and clinical relevance, barriers to identify PFD in female athletes are still present. The PFD-SENTINEL is a new resource for sports medicine clinicians who regularly assess female athletes and represents the first step towards early PFD identification and management. Further studies to validate the tool are needed.