Physical therapy (PT) is one of the key disciplines in interdisciplinary stroke rehabilitation. The aim of this systematic review was to provide an update of the evidence for stroke rehabilitation interventions in the domain of PT. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) regarding PT in stroke rehabilitation were retrieved through a systematic search. Outcomes were classified according to the ICF. RCTs with a low risk of bias were quantitatively analyzed. Differences between phases poststroke were explored in subgroup analyses. A best evidence synthesis was performed for neurological treatment approaches. The search yielded 467 RCTs (N = 25373; median PEDro score 6 [IQR 5–7]), identifying 53 interventions. No adverse events were reported. Strong evidence was found for significant positive effects of 13 interventions related to gait, 11 interventions related to arm-hand activities, 1 intervention for ADL, and 3 interventions for physical fitness. Summary Effect Sizes (SESs) ranged from 0.17 (95%CI 0.03–0.70; I² = 0%) for therapeutic positioning of the paretic arm to 2.47 (95%CI 0.84–4.11; I² = 77%) for training of sitting balance. There is strong evidence that a higher dose of practice is better, with SESs ranging from 0.21 (95%CI 0.02–0.39; I² = 6%) for motor function of the paretic arm to 0.61 (95%CI 0.41–0.82; I² = 41%) for muscle strength of the paretic leg. Subgroup analyses yielded significant differences with respect to timing poststroke for 10 interventions. Neurological treatment approaches to training of body functions and activities showed equal or unfavorable effects when compared to other training interventions. Main limitations of the present review are not using individual patient data for meta-analyses and absence of correction for multiple testing. There is strong evidence for PT interventions favoring intensive high repetitive task-oriented and task-specific training in all phases poststroke. Effects are mostly restricted to the actually trained functions and activities. Suggestions for prioritizing PT stroke research are given.

Background . Robot technology for poststroke rehabilitation is developing rapidly. A number of new randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have investigated the effects of robot-assisted therapy for the paretic upper limb (RT-UL). Objective . To systematically review the effects of poststroke RT-UL on measures of motor control of the paretic arm, muscle strength and tone, upper limb capacity, and basic activities of daily living (ADL) in comparison with nonrobotic treatment. Methods . Relevant RCTs were identified in electronic searches. Meta-analyses were performed for measures of motor control (eg, Fugl-Meyer Assessment of the arm; FMA arm), muscle strength and tone, upper limb capacity, and basic ADL. Subgroup analyses were applied for the number of joints involved, robot type, timing poststroke, and treatment contrast. Results . Forty-four RCTs (N = 1362) were included. No serious adverse events were reported. Meta-analyses of 38 trials (N = 1206) showed significant but small improvements in motor control (~2 points FMA arm) and muscle strength of the paretic arm and a negative effect on muscle tone. No effects were found for upper limb capacity and basic ADL. Shoulder/elbow robotics showed small but significant effects on motor control and muscle strength, while elbow/wrist robotics had small but significant effects on motor control. Conclusions . RT-UL allows patients to increase the number of repetitions and hence intensity of practice poststroke, and appears to be a safe therapy. Effects on motor control are small and specific to the joints targeted by RT-UL, whereas no generalization is found to improvements in upper limb capacity. The impact of RT-UL started in the first weeks poststroke remains unclear. These limited findings could mainly be related to poor understanding of robot-induced motor learning as well as inadequate designing of RT-UL trials, by not applying an appropriate selection of stroke patients with a potential to recovery at baseline as well as the lack of fixed timing of baseline assessments and using an insufficient treatment contrast early poststroke.

Background and Purpose—: Knowledge about robust and unbiased factors that predict outcome of activities of daily living (ADL) is paramount in stroke management. This review investigates the methodological quality of prognostic studies in the early poststroke phase for final ADL to identify variables that are predictive or not predictive for outcome of ADL after stroke. Methods—: PubMed, Ebsco/Cinahl and Embase were systematically searched for prognostic studies in which stroke patients were included ≤2 weeks after onset and final outcome of ADL was determined ≥3 months poststroke. Risk of bias scores were used to distinguish high- and low-quality studies and a qualitative synthesis was performed. Results—: Forty-eight of 8425 identified citations were included. The median risk of bias score was 17 out of 27 (range, 6–22) points. Most studies failed to report medical treatment applied, management of missing data, rationale for candidate determinants and outcome cut-offs, results of univariable analysis, and validation and performance of the model, making the predictive value of most determinants indistinct. Six high-quality studies showed strong evidence for baseline neurological status, upper limb paresis, and age as predictors for outcome of ADL. Gender and risk factors such as atrial fibrillation were unrelated to this outcome. Conclusions—: Because of insufficient methodological quality of most prognostic studies, the predictive value of many clinical determinants for outcome of ADL remains unclear. Future cohort studies should focus on early prediction using simple models with good clinical performance to enhance application in stroke management and research.

Background and Purpose—: Assessing upper limb movements poststroke is crucial to monitor and understand sensorimotor recovery. Kinematic assessments are expected to enable a sensitive quantification of movement quality and distinguish between restitution and compensation. The nature and practice of these assessments are highly variable and used without knowledge of their clinimetric properties. This presents a challenge when interpreting and comparing results. The purpose of this review was to summarize the state of the art regarding kinematic upper limb assessments poststroke with respect to the assessment task, measurement system, and performance metrics with their clinimetric properties. Subsequently, we aimed to provide evidence-based recommendations for future applications of upper limb kinematics in stroke recovery research. Methods—: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and IEEE Xplore. Studies investigating clinimetric properties of applied metrics were assessed for risk of bias using the Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments checklist. The quality of evidence for metrics was determined according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. Results—: A total of 225 studies (N=6197) using 151 different kinematic metrics were identified and allocated to 5 task and 3 measurement system groups. Thirty studies investigated clinimetrics of 62 metrics: reliability (n=8), measurement error (n=5), convergent validity (n=22), and responsiveness (n=2). The metrics task/movement time, number of movement onsets, number of movement ends, path length ratio, peak velocity, number of velocity peaks, trunk displacement, and shoulder flexion/extension received a sufficient evaluation for one clinimetric property. Conclusions—: Studies on kinematic assessments of upper limb sensorimotor function are poorly standardized and rarely investigate clinimetrics in an unbiased manner. Based on the available evidence, recommendations on the assessment task, measurement system, and performance metrics were made with the goal to increase standardization. Further high-quality studies evaluating clinimetric properties are needed to validate kinematic assessments, with the long-term goal to elucidate upper limb sensorimotor recovery poststroke. Clinical Trial Registration—: URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/ . Unique identifier: CRD42017064279.

Background and Purpose—: The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of augmented exercise therapy on gait, gait-related activities, and (basic and extended) activities of daily living within the first 6 months poststroke. Methods—: A systematic literature search in electronic databases from 1990 until October 2010 was performed. Randomized controlled trials were included in which the experimental group spent augmented time in lower-limb exercise therapy compared with the control group. Outcomes were gait, gait-related activities, and (extended) activities of daily living. Results from individual studies were pooled by calculating the summary effect sizes. Subgroup analyses were applied for a treatment contrast of ≥16 hours, timing poststroke, type of control intervention, and methodological quality. Results—: Fourteen (N=725) of 4966 identified studies were included. Pooling resulted in small to moderate significant summary effect sizes in favor of augmented exercise therapy for walking ability, comfortable and maximum walking speed, and extended activities of daily living. No significant effects were found for basic activities of daily living. Subgroup analysis did not show a significant effect modification. Conclusions—: Dose–response trials in stroke rehabilitation are heterogeneous. The present meta-analysis suggests that increased time spent on exercise of gait and gait-related activities in the first 6 months poststroke results in significant small to moderate effects in terms of walking ability, walking speed, and extended activities of daily living. High-quality dose–response exercise therapy trials are needed with identical treatment goals but incremental levels of intensity.