What is the evidence for physical therapy poststroke? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

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 rehabilita...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Janne Marieke Veerbeek, Erwin van Wegen, Roland van Peppen, Philip Jan van der Wees, Erik Hendriks, Marc Rietberg, Gert Kwakkel
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2014-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3913786?pdf=render
id doaj-2a974f1baebd4c79885f6d0df5b0d9b1
record_format Article
spelling doaj-2a974f1baebd4c79885f6d0df5b0d9b12020-11-24T22:00:30ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032014-01-0192e8798710.1371/journal.pone.0087987What is the evidence for physical therapy poststroke? A systematic review and meta-analysis.Janne Marieke VeerbeekErwin van WegenRoland van PeppenPhilip Jan van der WeesErik HendriksMarc RietbergGert KwakkelPhysical 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; I(2) = 0%) for therapeutic positioning of the paretic arm to 2.47 (95%CI 0.84-4.11; I(2) = 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; I(2) = 6%) for motor function of the paretic arm to 0.61 (95%CI 0.41-0.82; I(2) = 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.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3913786?pdf=render
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Janne Marieke Veerbeek
Erwin van Wegen
Roland van Peppen
Philip Jan van der Wees
Erik Hendriks
Marc Rietberg
Gert Kwakkel
spellingShingle Janne Marieke Veerbeek
Erwin van Wegen
Roland van Peppen
Philip Jan van der Wees
Erik Hendriks
Marc Rietberg
Gert Kwakkel
What is the evidence for physical therapy poststroke? A systematic review and meta-analysis.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Janne Marieke Veerbeek
Erwin van Wegen
Roland van Peppen
Philip Jan van der Wees
Erik Hendriks
Marc Rietberg
Gert Kwakkel
author_sort Janne Marieke Veerbeek
title What is the evidence for physical therapy poststroke? A systematic review and meta-analysis.
title_short What is the evidence for physical therapy poststroke? A systematic review and meta-analysis.
title_full What is the evidence for physical therapy poststroke? A systematic review and meta-analysis.
title_fullStr What is the evidence for physical therapy poststroke? A systematic review and meta-analysis.
title_full_unstemmed What is the evidence for physical therapy poststroke? A systematic review and meta-analysis.
title_sort what is the evidence for physical therapy poststroke? a systematic review and meta-analysis.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2014-01-01
description 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; I(2) = 0%) for therapeutic positioning of the paretic arm to 2.47 (95%CI 0.84-4.11; I(2) = 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; I(2) = 6%) for motor function of the paretic arm to 0.61 (95%CI 0.41-0.82; I(2) = 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.
url http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3913786?pdf=render
work_keys_str_mv AT jannemariekeveerbeek whatistheevidenceforphysicaltherapypoststrokeasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT erwinvanwegen whatistheevidenceforphysicaltherapypoststrokeasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT rolandvanpeppen whatistheevidenceforphysicaltherapypoststrokeasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT philipjanvanderwees whatistheevidenceforphysicaltherapypoststrokeasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT erikhendriks whatistheevidenceforphysicaltherapypoststrokeasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT marcrietberg whatistheevidenceforphysicaltherapypoststrokeasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT gertkwakkel whatistheevidenceforphysicaltherapypoststrokeasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
_version_ 1725844217599623168