基于神经接口的运动神经假体在中风后上肢神经康复中的应用:患者个体数据荟萃分析。

IF 3.6 2区 医学 Q1 REHABILITATION
Yu Tung Lo MBBS , Mervyn Jun Rui Lim MBBS, MPH , Chun Yen Kok , Shilin Wang MBBS , Sebastiaan Zhiyong Blok , Ting Yao Ang MBBS , Vincent Yew Poh Ng MBBS , Jai Prashanth Rao MBBS , Karen Sui Geok Chua MBBS
{"title":"基于神经接口的运动神经假体在中风后上肢神经康复中的应用:患者个体数据荟萃分析。","authors":"Yu Tung Lo MBBS ,&nbsp;Mervyn Jun Rui Lim MBBS, MPH ,&nbsp;Chun Yen Kok ,&nbsp;Shilin Wang MBBS ,&nbsp;Sebastiaan Zhiyong Blok ,&nbsp;Ting Yao Ang MBBS ,&nbsp;Vincent Yew Poh Ng MBBS ,&nbsp;Jai Prashanth Rao MBBS ,&nbsp;Karen Sui Geok Chua MBBS","doi":"10.1016/j.apmr.2024.04.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To determine the efficacy of neural interface–based neurorehabilitation, including brain-computer interface, through conventional and individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis and to assess clinical parameters associated with positive response to neural interface–based neurorehabilitation.</div></div><div><h3>Data Sources</h3><div>PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases up to February 2022 were reviewed.</div></div><div><h3>Study Selection</h3><div>Studies using neural interface–controlled physical effectors (functional electrical stimulation and/or powered exoskeletons) and reported Fugl-Meyer Assessment–upper-extremity (FMA-UE) scores were identified. This meta-analysis was prospectively registered on PROSPERO (#CRD42022312428). PRISMA guidelines were followed.</div></div><div><h3>Data Extraction</h3><div>Changes in FMA-UE scores were pooled to estimate the mean effect size. Subgroup analyses were performed on clinical parameters and neural interface parameters with both study-level variables and IPD.</div></div><div><h3>Data Synthesis</h3><div>Forty-six studies containing 617 patients were included. Twenty-nine studies involving 214 patients reported IPD. FMA-UE scores increased by a mean of 5.23 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.85-6.61). Systems that used motor attempt resulted in greater FMA-UE gain than motor imagery, as did training lasting &gt;4 vs ≤4 weeks. On IPD analysis, the mean time-to-improvement above minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was 12 weeks (95% CI: 7 to not reached). At 6 months, 58% improved above MCID (95% CI: 41%-70%). Patients with severe impairment (<em>P</em>=.042) and age &gt;50 years (<em>P</em>=.0022) correlated with the failure to improve above the MCID on univariate log-rank tests. However, these factors were only borderline significant on multivariate Cox analysis (hazard ratio [HR] 0.15, <em>P</em>=.08 and HR 0.47, <em>P</em>=.06, respectively).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Neural interface–based motor rehabilitation resulted in significant, although modest, reductions in poststroke impairment and should be considered for wider applications in stroke neurorehabilitation.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":8313,"journal":{"name":"Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation","volume":"105 12","pages":"Pages 2336-2349"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Neural Interface-Based Motor Neuroprosthesis in Poststroke Upper Limb Neurorehabilitation: An Individual Patient Data Meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Yu Tung Lo MBBS ,&nbsp;Mervyn Jun Rui Lim MBBS, MPH ,&nbsp;Chun Yen Kok ,&nbsp;Shilin Wang MBBS ,&nbsp;Sebastiaan Zhiyong Blok ,&nbsp;Ting Yao Ang MBBS ,&nbsp;Vincent Yew Poh Ng MBBS ,&nbsp;Jai Prashanth Rao MBBS ,&nbsp;Karen Sui Geok Chua MBBS\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.apmr.2024.04.001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To determine the efficacy of neural interface–based neurorehabilitation, including brain-computer interface, through conventional and individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis and to assess clinical parameters associated with positive response to neural interface–based neurorehabilitation.</div></div><div><h3>Data Sources</h3><div>PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases up to February 2022 were reviewed.</div></div><div><h3>Study Selection</h3><div>Studies using neural interface–controlled physical effectors (functional electrical stimulation and/or powered exoskeletons) and reported Fugl-Meyer Assessment–upper-extremity (FMA-UE) scores were identified. This meta-analysis was prospectively registered on PROSPERO (#CRD42022312428). PRISMA guidelines were followed.</div></div><div><h3>Data Extraction</h3><div>Changes in FMA-UE scores were pooled to estimate the mean effect size. Subgroup analyses were performed on clinical parameters and neural interface parameters with both study-level variables and IPD.</div></div><div><h3>Data Synthesis</h3><div>Forty-six studies containing 617 patients were included. Twenty-nine studies involving 214 patients reported IPD. FMA-UE scores increased by a mean of 5.23 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.85-6.61). Systems that used motor attempt resulted in greater FMA-UE gain than motor imagery, as did training lasting &gt;4 vs ≤4 weeks. On IPD analysis, the mean time-to-improvement above minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was 12 weeks (95% CI: 7 to not reached). At 6 months, 58% improved above MCID (95% CI: 41%-70%). Patients with severe impairment (<em>P</em>=.042) and age &gt;50 years (<em>P</em>=.0022) correlated with the failure to improve above the MCID on univariate log-rank tests. However, these factors were only borderline significant on multivariate Cox analysis (hazard ratio [HR] 0.15, <em>P</em>=.08 and HR 0.47, <em>P</em>=.06, respectively).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Neural interface–based motor rehabilitation resulted in significant, although modest, reductions in poststroke impairment and should be considered for wider applications in stroke neurorehabilitation.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8313,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation\",\"volume\":\"105 12\",\"pages\":\"Pages 2336-2349\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0003999324009109\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0003999324009109","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Neural Interface-Based Motor Neuroprosthesis in Poststroke Upper Limb Neurorehabilitation: An Individual Patient Data Meta-analysis

Objective

To determine the efficacy of neural interface–based neurorehabilitation, including brain-computer interface, through conventional and individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis and to assess clinical parameters associated with positive response to neural interface–based neurorehabilitation.

Data Sources

PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases up to February 2022 were reviewed.

Study Selection

Studies using neural interface–controlled physical effectors (functional electrical stimulation and/or powered exoskeletons) and reported Fugl-Meyer Assessment–upper-extremity (FMA-UE) scores were identified. This meta-analysis was prospectively registered on PROSPERO (#CRD42022312428). PRISMA guidelines were followed.

Data Extraction

Changes in FMA-UE scores were pooled to estimate the mean effect size. Subgroup analyses were performed on clinical parameters and neural interface parameters with both study-level variables and IPD.

Data Synthesis

Forty-six studies containing 617 patients were included. Twenty-nine studies involving 214 patients reported IPD. FMA-UE scores increased by a mean of 5.23 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.85-6.61). Systems that used motor attempt resulted in greater FMA-UE gain than motor imagery, as did training lasting >4 vs ≤4 weeks. On IPD analysis, the mean time-to-improvement above minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was 12 weeks (95% CI: 7 to not reached). At 6 months, 58% improved above MCID (95% CI: 41%-70%). Patients with severe impairment (P=.042) and age >50 years (P=.0022) correlated with the failure to improve above the MCID on univariate log-rank tests. However, these factors were only borderline significant on multivariate Cox analysis (hazard ratio [HR] 0.15, P=.08 and HR 0.47, P=.06, respectively).

Conclusion

Neural interface–based motor rehabilitation resulted in significant, although modest, reductions in poststroke impairment and should be considered for wider applications in stroke neurorehabilitation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
4.70%
发文量
495
审稿时长
38 days
期刊介绍: The Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation publishes original, peer-reviewed research and clinical reports on important trends and developments in physical medicine and rehabilitation and related fields. This international journal brings researchers and clinicians authoritative information on the therapeutic utilization of physical, behavioral and pharmaceutical agents in providing comprehensive care for individuals with chronic illness and disabilities. Archives began publication in 1920, publishes monthly, and is the official journal of the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine. Its papers are cited more often than any other rehabilitation journal.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信