Effectiveness of Action Observation and Motor Imagery on Relearning Upper Extremity Function After Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

International Clinical Neuroscience Journal Pub Date : 2022-01-20 DOI:10.34172/icnj.2022.05

Nandana Welage, M. Bissett, K. Fong, P. Fahey, K. Coxon, Karen P. Y. Liu

{"title":"Effectiveness of Action Observation and Motor Imagery on Relearning Upper Extremity Function After Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis","authors":"Nandana Welage, M. Bissett, K. Fong, P. Fahey, K. Coxon, Karen P. Y. Liu","doi":"10.34172/icnj.2022.05","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The effectiveness of action observation (AO) and motor imagery (MI) in high-quality studies with less risk of bias is rarely reported together. This systematic review evaluates the effectiveness of AO and MI on improving upper extremity function among people after stroke by combining evidence of studies with high methodological quality. Randomised controlled trials, with a score of 6 or above in the PEDro Scale, that examined the effects of AO or MI for people with stroke were selected. A narrative analysis and meta-analysis were conducted using the PRISMA guidelines. Ten randomised controlled trials from 11 articles met the inclusion criteria. The results of meta-analysis showed that AO had a small to moderate statistically significant effect on improving upper extremity motor function (standardized mean difference, SMD=0.34; confidence interval, CI=0.08, 0.59; P=0.35; I 2=0.00%) and no significant effect on MI (SMD=0.08; CI=-0.26, 0.42; P=0.65; I2=0.00%) when compared with the control intervention. Evidence was found in support of AO and it is recommended for people with acute or sub-acute stroke.","PeriodicalId":33222,"journal":{"name":"International Clinical Neuroscience Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Clinical Neuroscience Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34172/icnj.2022.05","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 2

Abstract

The effectiveness of action observation (AO) and motor imagery (MI) in high-quality studies with less risk of bias is rarely reported together. This systematic review evaluates the effectiveness of AO and MI on improving upper extremity function among people after stroke by combining evidence of studies with high methodological quality. Randomised controlled trials, with a score of 6 or above in the PEDro Scale, that examined the effects of AO or MI for people with stroke were selected. A narrative analysis and meta-analysis were conducted using the PRISMA guidelines. Ten randomised controlled trials from 11 articles met the inclusion criteria. The results of meta-analysis showed that AO had a small to moderate statistically significant effect on improving upper extremity motor function (standardized mean difference, SMD=0.34; confidence interval, CI=0.08, 0.59; P=0.35; I 2=0.00%) and no significant effect on MI (SMD=0.08; CI=-0.26, 0.42; P=0.65; I2=0.00%) when compared with the control intervention. Evidence was found in support of AO and it is recommended for people with acute or sub-acute stroke.

查看原文本刊更多论文

动作观察和运动想像对脑卒中后上肢功能再学习的效果:系统回顾和meta分析

在偏差风险较小的高质量研究中，动作观察（AO）和运动图像（MI）的有效性很少一起报道。本系统综述通过结合具有高方法学质量的研究证据，评估AO和MI在改善中风后患者上肢功能方面的有效性。选择PEDro量表得分为6分或以上的随机对照试验，研究AO或MI对中风患者的影响。使用PRISMA指南进行叙述性分析和荟萃分析。来自11篇文章的10项随机对照试验符合纳入标准。荟萃分析结果显示，与对照干预相比，AO在改善上肢运动功能方面具有小到中等的统计学意义（标准化平均差，SMD=0.34；置信区间，CI=0.08,0.59；P=0.035；I2=0.00%），对MI没有显著影响（SMD=0.08；CI=0.26,0.42；P=0.65；I2=0.000%）。有证据支持AO，建议急性或亚急性中风患者使用。

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

International Clinical Neuroscience Journal

自引率

0.00%

发文量

审稿时长

4 weeks