Characteristics and Trends of Randomized Controlled Trials on Post-Stroke Unilateral Spatial Neglect Rehabilitation: A Systematic Review.

IF 2 4区 医学 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
NeuroRehabilitation Pub Date : 2026-05-01 Epub Date: 2026-02-19 DOI:10.1177/10538135261420360
Sarvenaz Mehrabi, Mohammad R Safaei-Qomi, Cecilia Flores-Sandoval, Jamie L Fleet, Ricardo Viana, Sean Dukelow, Robert Teasell
{"title":"Characteristics and Trends of Randomized Controlled Trials on Post-Stroke Unilateral Spatial Neglect Rehabilitation: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Sarvenaz Mehrabi, Mohammad R Safaei-Qomi, Cecilia Flores-Sandoval, Jamie L Fleet, Ricardo Viana, Sean Dukelow, Robert Teasell","doi":"10.1177/10538135261420360","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>BackgroundUnilateral spatial neglect (USN) is a common post-stroke deficit that adversely affects activities of daily living and functional independence. Despite advancements in stroke rehabilitation research, USN-specific rehabilitation studies remain relatively limited, contributing to a gap in evidence-based clinical practice.ObjectiveTo characterize randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating post-stroke USN rehabilitation interventions and to provide an overview of the intervention types studied and gaps in the current literature.MethodsSystematic searches of MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL, and PsycINFO were conducted from inception to December 31, 2024. The methodological quality of included RCTs was assessed using the PEDro scale.ResultsA total of 123 RCTs were included, collectively enrolling 3,419 participants. The annual number of trials has remained stable in recent years. The mean sample size was 27.8, and the majority of RCTs (60.2%) were conducted in the subacute phase post-stroke. A total of 44 unique types of intervention were examined across the 123 RCTs. Top-down interventions were evaluated in 49 RCTs (39.8%), while bottom-up therapies were examined in 82 RCTs (66.6%), and pharmacological interventions were used in only 6 studies (4.9%).ConclusionsFuture RCTs on neglect should recruit larger sample sizes, evaluate the efficacy of combined interventions, and implement time-sensitive treatment strategies to maximize gains in the earlier post stroke phase. Additionally, RCTs are needed to specifically address the impact of treatment timing on outcomes, and the long-term effects.</p>","PeriodicalId":19717,"journal":{"name":"NeuroRehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":"371-380"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"NeuroRehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10538135261420360","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/2/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BackgroundUnilateral spatial neglect (USN) is a common post-stroke deficit that adversely affects activities of daily living and functional independence. Despite advancements in stroke rehabilitation research, USN-specific rehabilitation studies remain relatively limited, contributing to a gap in evidence-based clinical practice.ObjectiveTo characterize randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating post-stroke USN rehabilitation interventions and to provide an overview of the intervention types studied and gaps in the current literature.MethodsSystematic searches of MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL, and PsycINFO were conducted from inception to December 31, 2024. The methodological quality of included RCTs was assessed using the PEDro scale.ResultsA total of 123 RCTs were included, collectively enrolling 3,419 participants. The annual number of trials has remained stable in recent years. The mean sample size was 27.8, and the majority of RCTs (60.2%) were conducted in the subacute phase post-stroke. A total of 44 unique types of intervention were examined across the 123 RCTs. Top-down interventions were evaluated in 49 RCTs (39.8%), while bottom-up therapies were examined in 82 RCTs (66.6%), and pharmacological interventions were used in only 6 studies (4.9%).ConclusionsFuture RCTs on neglect should recruit larger sample sizes, evaluate the efficacy of combined interventions, and implement time-sensitive treatment strategies to maximize gains in the earlier post stroke phase. Additionally, RCTs are needed to specifically address the impact of treatment timing on outcomes, and the long-term effects.

卒中后单侧空间忽视康复的随机对照试验的特点和趋势:一项系统综述。
单侧空间忽视(USN)是一种常见的卒中后缺陷,对日常生活活动和功能独立性产生不利影响。尽管脑卒中康复研究取得了进展,但针对usn的康复研究仍然相对有限,这导致了循证临床实践的差距。目的对评估脑卒中后USN康复干预措施的随机对照试验(rct)进行特征描述,并概述所研究的干预类型和当前文献中的空白。方法系统检索MEDLINE、Embase、Scopus、CINAHL、PsycINFO等数据库,检索时间自成立至2024年12月31日。采用PEDro量表评估纳入的随机对照试验的方法学质量。结果共纳入123项随机对照试验,共纳入3419名受试者。近年来,每年的审判数量保持稳定。平均样本量为27.8,大多数rct(60.2%)在脑卒中后亚急性期进行。在123项随机对照试验中,总共检查了44种独特的干预类型。49项rct评估了自上而下的干预措施(39.8%),82项rct评估了自下而上的治疗方法(66.6%),仅有6项研究使用了药物干预措施(4.9%)。结论未来关于忽视的随机对照试验应该招募更大的样本量,评估联合干预措施的效果,并实施时间敏感的治疗策略,以最大限度地提高卒中后早期的获益。此外,需要随机对照试验来专门解决治疗时间对结果的影响和长期影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
NeuroRehabilitation
NeuroRehabilitation CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-REHABILITATION
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
178
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: NeuroRehabilitation, an international, interdisciplinary, peer-reviewed journal, publishes manuscripts focused on scientifically based, practical information relevant to all aspects of neurologic rehabilitation. We publish unsolicited papers detailing original work/research that covers the full life span and range of neurological disabilities including stroke, spinal cord injury, traumatic brain injury, neuromuscular disease and other neurological disorders. We also publish thematically organized issues that focus on specific clinical disorders, types of therapy and age groups. Proposals for thematic issues and suggestions for issue editors are welcomed.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书