Hamstring injuries are one of the most common types of damage in sports. Insufficient flexibility and high stiffness are important reasons for it. Stretching is often used in warm-up activities before exercises to increase flexibility, among which dynamic stretching (DS) and static stretching (SS) are the most widely used. The effects of these two stretching techniques on the flexibility or stiffness of the hamstring still need to be clarified. This study aimed to compare the short-term, medium-term, and long-term effects of DS and SS on improving hamstring flexibility and stiffness via a meta-analysis of RCTs. RCTs were identified from PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and PEDro from inception to July 28, 2022. The methodological quality was evaluated using the PEDro scale. The mean difference and 95% confidence interval of the outcome variables before and after stretching were calculated and the extracted data were quantitatively processed using a random or fixed effects model. A total of 27 RCTs and 606 participants were included. In terms of improving the ROM of the hamstring, there was no significant difference in the acute (MD, −0.70, 95% CI, −1.54 to 0.14; Z = 1.63, P > 0.05) and sub-acute effects (MD, 1.71, 95% CI, −2.80 to 6.22; Z = 0.74, P > 0.05) between a single bout of SS and DS, while the acute (MD, −5.13, 95% CI, −7.65 to −2.61; Z = 3.99, P < 0.05) and sub-acute effects (MD, −5.30, 95% CI, −6.33 to −4.27; Z = 10.04, P < 0.05) of multiple bouts of SS was superior to DS; There was no significant difference in the medium-term effect between the two stretching techniques (MD, 3.48, 95% CI, −2.57 to 9.53; Z = 1.13, P > 0.05), but the long-term effect of SS was better than DS (MD, - 10.40, 95% CI, −10.97 to −9.83; Z = 35.57, P < 0.05). Regarding the length of the hamstring, the acute (MD, −0.41, 95% CI, −1.09 to 0.26; Z = 1.20, P > 0.05) and sub-acute effects (MD, −0.73, 95% CI, −1.69 to 0.22; Z = 1.51, P > 0.05) of a single bout of DS and SS were similar. Two studies have compared the effects on hamstring stiffness, with one showing similar effects, and the other showed that DS was superior to SS. One study showed no difference in the magnitude of change in improving passive torque. No studies explored the effect of DS and SS on hamstring myofascial length. Only one study demonstrated no significant difference in hamstring thickness. A single bout of DS and SS have similar short-term effects in improving hamstring ROM and length, while multiple bouts of SS can significantly improve hamstring ROM compared to DS. DS and SS showed similar effects on hamstring myofascial length.

Patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) usually demonstrate poor postural control due to impaired core muscle function. Dynamic neuromuscular stabilization (DNS) is based on developmental kinesiology principles, utilizing infant motor patterns to treat motor disorders. DNS has been shown to improve postural control in cerebral palsy patients by activating core muscle. However, whether the DNS approach is superior for enhancing core muscle contractility and postural control in CLBP patients still remains unclear. This study aimed to compare the effects of DNS training and conventional core exercises on core muscle contractility and standing postural control in CLBP patients. Sixty CLBP patients were randomly assigned to a DNS group or a control group. Participants in the DNS group received DNS training, while those in the control group completed conventional core exercises. Both groups completed 12 sessions over 4 weeks (3 sessions/week, 50 min/session). Pre- and post-intervention evaluations included diagnostic musculoskeletal ultrasound to assess the change rate of core muscles (transversus abdominis (TrA), lumbar multifidus, and diaphragm), a balance assessment system to evaluate postural control performance (center of pressure displacement (COP)), and clinical questionnaires (Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RDQ)) for pain intensity and disability. After 4 weeks, comparisons between both groups revealed significant statistical differences in the interaction effects of time*group. These differences were observed in the change rates of the left and right TrA (F1,58=4.820 and 3.964, p = 0.032 and 0.041), diaphragm change rate (F1,58=11.945, p = 0.001), as well as COP velocity (F1,58=5.283, p = 0.025), variability (F1,58=13.189, p = 0.001) in the anterior-posterior (AP) direction, COP path length (F1,58=6.395, p = 0.014), and COP area (F1,58=5.038, p = 0.029) in the eye-closed condition. DNS participants showed significantly greater muscle change rates and reduced COP (p < 0.05). The scores of VAS (F1,58=173.929, p = 0.001), ODI (F1,58=60.871, p = 0.001), and RDQ (F1,58=60.015, p = 0.001) decreased significantly over time, although no group differences were found between both groups (p > 0.05). DNS is superior to conventional core exercises in enhancing core muscle contractility and standing postural control in CLBP patients, showing potential to reduce pain and improve disability. Its mechanism may involve the enhancement of proprioceptive feedback, particularly when visual feedback is blocked. This study was registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR) with the registration number ChiCTR2300074595 on 10 August 2023.

Original Article Parents’ knowledge and attitude and behavior toward autism: a survey of Chinese families having children with autism spectrum disorder Fang Wang, U-Chong Lao, Yi-Pei Xing, Ping Zhou, Wen-Lin Deng, Yu Wang, Yue Ji, Miao-Ying Chen, Hai Li, Xiao-Bing Zou

Background: Intermittent theta burst stimulation (iTBS) is a promising noninvasive therapy to restore the excitability of the cortex, and subsequently improve the function of the upper extremities. Several studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of iTBS in restoring upper limb function and modulating cortical excitability. We aimed to evaluate the effects of iTBS on upper limb motor recovery after stroke.Objective: The purpose of this article is to evaluate the influence of intermittent theta-burst stimulation on upper limb motor recovery and improve the quality of life.Method: A literature search was conducted using PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and CBM, including only English studies, to identify studies that investigated the effects of iTBS on upper limb recovery, compared with sham iTBS used in control groups. Effect size was reported as standardized mean difference (SMD) or weighted mean difference (WMD).Results: Ten studies were included in the meta-analysis. The results of the meta-analysis indicated that when compared to the control group, the iTBS group had a significant difference in the Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA) and Action Research Arm Test (ARAT) (WMD: 3.20, 95% CI: 1.42 to 4.97; WMD: 3.72, 95% CI: 2.13 to 5.30, respectively). In addition, there was also a significant improvement in the modified Ashworth scale (MAS) compared to the sham group (WMD: −0.56; 95% CI: −0.85 to −0.28). More evidence is still needed to confirm the effect of Barthel Index (BI) scores after interventions. However, no significant effect was found for the assessment of Motor Evoked Potential (MEP) amplitude and MEP latency (SMD: 0.35; 95% CI: −0.21 to 0.90; SMD: 0.35, 95% CI: −0.18 to 0.87; SMD: 0.03, 95% CI: −0.49 to 0.55; respectively).Conclusion: Our results showed that iTBS significantly improved motor impairment, functional activities, and reduced muscle tone of upper limbs, thereby increasing the ability to perform Activities of Daily Living (ADL) in stroke patients, while there were no significant differences in MEPs. In conclusion, iTBS is a promising non-invasive brain stimulation as an adjunct to therapy and enhances the therapeutic effect of conventional physical therapy. In the future, more randomized controlled trials with large sample sizes, high quality, and follow-up are necessary to explore the neurophysiological effects.Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42023392739.

Stroke is a leading cause of long-term disability, often resulting in upper extremity dysfunction. Traditional rehabilitation methods often face challenges such as limited patient access to resources and lack of sustained motivation. Home-based virtual reality (VR) training is gaining traction as an innovative, sustainable and interactive alternative. However, the effect of home-based VR, specifically for upper extremity recovery in patients with stroke, remains insufficiently explored. This systematic review aims to synthesize existing evidence to evaluate the impact of home-based VR interventions on upper extremity function recovery in patients with stroke. This systematic review followed the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). A comprehensive literature search was conducted across PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and CINAHL Ultimate databases, targeting English-language randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up to June 30, 2024. Eligible studies involved stroke patients with upper extremity dysfunction who received home-based VR interventions. Data extraction was performed by two independent reviewers, and study quality was assessed using the PEDro scale. Due to heterogeneity in study designs and outcome measures, a narrative synthesis was performed instead of a meta-analysis. Eight RCTs with 392 participants were included. This review shows that home-based VR training positively affects upper extremity function recovery in patients with stroke, especially in motor control improvement. Customized VR systems were more effective than commercial VR systems in patients with moderate to severe disorders. Although studies generally showed positive results, differences in intervention protocols and small sample sizes limited the validity of results. The effect of VR therapy also varied based on the VR system type, intervention intensity, and the functional level of patients. This systematic review shows that home-based VR training has a positive impact on upper extremity rehabilitation for stroke patients, particularly in those with varying degrees of dysfunction. However, heterogeneity in study design and differences in outcome measures affect the reliability of the current conclusions. Future studies should include larger, standardized RCTs with long-term follow-up to assess their continued effects. Future research should explore how VR technology can be integrated into comprehensive rehabilitation programs, focusing on patient-centered approaches that incorporate sustainable, personalized technology and support services to optimize recovery outcomes. PROSPERO CRD42024526650; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42024526650.

This study investigated electroencephalogram (EEG) changes during movement preparation and execution in stroke patients. EEG-based event-related potential (ERP) technology was used to measure brain activity changes. Seventeen stroke patients participated in this study and completed ERP tests that were designed to measure EEG changes during unilateral upper limb movements in preparation and execution stages, with Instruction Response Movement (IRM) and Cued Instruction Response Movement (CIRM) paradigms. EEG data were analyzed using motor potential (MP) in the time domain and the mu-rhythm and beta frequency band response mean value (R-means) in the time–frequency domain. In IRM, the MP amplitude at Cz was higher during hemiplegic arm movement than during unaffected arm movement. MP latency was shorter at Cz and the contralesional motor cortex during hemiplegic arm movement in CIRM compared to IRM. No significant differences were found in R-means among locations, between movement sides in both ERP tests. This study presents the brain activity changes in the time and time–frequency domains in stroke patients during movement preparation and execution and supports the contralesional compensation and adjacent-region compensation mechanism of post-stroke brain reconstruction. These findings may contribute to future rehabilitation research about neuroplasticity and technology development such as the brain–computer interface.