Constraint-induced movement therapy (CIMT) is one of the most popular treatments for enhancing upper and lower extremity motor activities and participation in patients following a stroke. However, the effect of CIMT on balance is unclear and needs further clarification. The aim of this research was to estimate the effect of CIMT on balance and functional mobility in patients after stroke. After reviewing 161 studies from search engines including Google Scholar, EBSCO, PubMed, PEDro, Science Direct, Scopus, and Web of Science, we included eight randomized controlled trials (RCT) in this study. The methodological quality of the included RCTs was verified using PEDro scoring. This systematic review showed positive effects of CIMT on balance in three studies and similar effects in five studies when compared to the control interventions such as neuro developmental treatment, modified forced-use therapy and conventional physical therapy. Furthermore, a meta-analysis indicated a statistically significant effect size by a standardized mean difference of 0.51 (P = 0.01), showing that the groups who received CIMT had improved more than the control groups. However, the meta-analysis results for functional mobility were statistically insignificant, with an effect size of −4.18 (P = 0.16), indicating that the functional mobility improvements in the investigated groups were not greater than the control group. This study’s findings demonstrated the superior effects of CIMT on balance; however, the effect size analysis of functional mobility was statistically insignificant. These findings indicate that CIMT interventions can improve balance-related motor function better than neuro developmental treatment, modified forced-use therapy and conventional physical therapy in patients after a stroke.

(1) Background: Proprioception and limits of stability can significantly impact static and dynamic balance. Knee proprioception and limits of stability may be impaired in individuals with knee osteoarthritis (KOA). Impaired knee proprioception may impact the limits of stability, and understanding the associations between these factors is important for formulating treatment strategies in this population. The objectives of this study are to (a) compare the knee joint position error (JPE) and limits of stability between KOA and asymptomatic individuals and (b) assess the correlation between knee JPE and the limits of stability in KOA individuals. (2) Methods: This cross-sectional study included 50 individuals diagnosed with bilateral KOA and 50 asymptomatic individuals. Knee JPE was measured using a dual digital inclinometer at 25° and 45° of knee flexion (in the dominant and nondominant legs). The limits of stability variables, including reaction time (s), maximum excursion (%), and direction control (%), were evaluated using computerized dynamic posturography. (3) Results: The magnitude of the mean knee JPE is significantly larger in KOA individuals (p < 0.001) compared to asymptomatic individuals assessed at 25° and 45° of knee flexion in both the dominant and nondominant legs. The limits of stability test showed that KOA group individuals had a longer reaction time (1.64 ± 0.30 s) and reduced maximum excursion (4.37 ± 0.45) and direction control (78.42 ± 5.47) percentages compared to the asymptomatic group (reaction time = 0.89 ± 0.29, maximum excursion = 5.25 ± 1.34, direction control = 87.50 ± 4.49). Knee JPE showed moderate to strong correlations with the reaction time (r = 0.60 to 0.68, p < 0.001), maximum excursion (r = −0.28 to −0.38, p < 0.001) and direction control (r = −0.59 to −0.65, p < 0.001) parameters in the limits of stability test. (4) Conclusions: Knee proprioception and limits of stability are impaired in KOA individuals compared to asymptomatic individuals, and knee JPE showed significant relationships with the limits of stability variables. These factors and correlations may be considered when evaluating and developing treatment strategies for KOA patients.

Cervical joint position sense (JPS) and postural stability are vital to maintaining balance and preventing falls in fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS). Impaired cervical JPS may influence postural stability, and understanding the relationship between them can aid in formulating treatment strategies in individuals with FMS. This study aims to (1) assess cervical JPS and postural stability between FMS and control group and (2) determine the correlation between cervical JPS and postural stability in the FMS group. This cross-sectional study recruited 92 FMS patients (mean age: 51.52 ± 7.7 yrs.) and 92 healthy controls (mean age: 49.36 ± 6.9 yrs.). A cervical range of motion (CROM) unit was utilized to assess cervical JPS. The postural stability was assessed using an IsoFree force platform, and anterior-posterior (A/P) and medial-lateral (M/L) directions of sway and ellipse area were measured. Cervical JPS and postural stability tests were assessed and compared between FMS and control groups. Cervical JPS was significantly impaired in FMS compared to the control group (p < 0.001). The JPS errors in FMS group were larger in flexion (FMS = 5.5°, control = 2.4°), extension (FMS = 6.4°, control = 3.0°), and rotation in left (FMS = 5.4°, control = 2.2°) and right directions (FMS = 5.1°, control = 2.8°). FMS individuals demonstrated statistically significant impaired postural stability compared to control in both the dominant and non-dominant legs tested (p < 0.001). The cervical JPS test showed moderate to strong positive correlations with postural stability variables. Statistically significant correlations were observed in all the JPS directions tested with all the postural stability variables (A/P and M/L sway and ellipse area). The correlation coefficients ranged between r = 0.37 (moderate) to 0.75 (strong). Cervical JPS and postural stability are impaired in FMS individuals. A moderate to strong relationship existed between JPS and postural stability. Individuals with FMS who had a greater magnitude of cervical JPS errors exhibited more severe postural control deficits. Therefore, cervical JPS and postural stability tests should be incorporated into routine clinical practice when assessing or formulating treatment strategies for patients with FMS.

Assessment of work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSDs) using the Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA) and the Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire (NMQ) has become widely accepted and reported in the literature. The objectives of this study are to (1) recognize and describe the topmost 50 cited scientific articles in WMSDs using the RULA and NMQ and (2) explore the factors that contribute to making an article influential. In this bibliometric study, we used the Web of Science and MEDLINE databases to identify the top 50 cited articles published from 1993 to 2022. The data collected were the title of the journal, number of citations, year of publication, type of the study, institution where the work was conducted, level of evidence, contribution of primary authors, and country of origin of the work. Our results showed that the top 50 cited articles were published between 1980 and 2010. The 2000s was the most valuable decade. Regarding journals, the Work journal had the highest number of articles concerning the use of RULA and NMQ in healthcare professionals. The maximum number of citations regarding RULA occurred in the Journal of Robotic Surgery (n = 50) and the maximum for NMQ occurred in the Journal of Safety Research (n = 106). Most articles originated from the United States, followed by England and the Netherlands. Eight authors had two publications published in the top 50 list. The majority of the topmost cited research articles were cross-sectional studies. Most of these studies were level III evidence. The bibliometric analysis from this study provides insights to researchers to choose the most appropriate and influential journal for submitting work on WMSDs.

Constraint-induced movement therapy (CIMT) has been delivered in the stroke population to improve lower-extremity functions. However, its efficacy on prime components of functional ambulation, such as gait speed, balance, and cardiovascular outcomes, is ambiguous. The present review aims to delineate the effect of various lower-extremity CIMT (LECIMT) protocols on gait speed, balance, and cardiovascular outcomes. Material and methods: The databases used to collect relevant articles were EBSCO, PubMed, PEDro, Science Direct, Scopus, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Web of Science. For this analysis, clinical trials involving stroke populations in different stages of recovery, >18 years old, and treated with LECIMT were considered. Only ten studies were included in this review, as they fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The effect of CIMT on gait speed and balance outcomes was accomplished using a random or fixed-effect model. CIMT, when compared to controlled interventions, showed superior or similar effects. The effect of LECIMT on gait speed and balance were non-significant, with mean differences (SMDs) of 0.13 and 4.94 and at 95% confidence intervals (Cis) of (−0.18–0.44) and (−2.48–12.37), respectively. In this meta-analysis, we observed that despite the fact that several trials claimed the efficacy of LECIMT in improving lower-extremity functions, gait speed and balance did not demonstrate a significant effect size favoring LECIMT. Therefore, CIMT treatment protocols should consider the patient’s functional requirements, cardinal principles of CIMT, and cardiorespiratory parameters.

Background: Individuals with fibromyalgia syndrome (FM) usually present with a fear of movement (kinesiophobia), which causes their symptoms to be maintained and exacerbated. Kinesiophobia can significantly impact postural control; ascertaining their association is crucial in evaluating and managing individuals with FM. This study aims to (1) compare postural control between individuals with FM and asymptomatic individuals, (2) estimate the relationship between kinesiophobia and postural control in individuals with FM, and (3) evaluate whether pain intensity mediates the association between kinesiophobia and postural control in individuals with FM. Methods: This study enrolled 92 individuals (mean age: 51.52 ± 7.7 years) diagnosed with FM and 106 asymptomatic individuals (mean age: 50.47 ± 6.6 years). The examiners estimated the fear of movement and the intensity of pain utilizing the Tampa scale of kinesiophobia (TSK) scores and the visual analogue scale (VAS), respectively. The postural control variables included anteroposterior (A-P) sway in mm, medio-lateral (M-L) sway in mm, and ellipse area in mm². Results: The individuals with FM had impaired postural control compared to the asymptomatic individuals (p < 0.001). Kinesiophobia exhibited mild-to-moderate correlations with the postural control variables (nondominant side: A-P sway: r = 0.48, M-L sway: r = 0.49, ellipse area: r = 0.43. Dominant side: A-P sway: r = 0.41, M-L sway: r = 0.33, ellipse area: r = 0.44). The pain intensity significantly mediated the relationship between kinesiophobia and postural control (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Kinesiophobia showed a significant positive relationship with postural control. The individuals with FM with higher TSK scores had decreased postural control. Pain intensity mediated the relationship between kinesiophobia and postural control. These factors must be considered when evaluating and formulating treatment strategies for people with FM.