神经恢复的群体与个体治疗:系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 3.7 2区 医学 Q1 REHABILITATION
Tharika Rodrigo, Susan Hillier, Ines Serrada, Ashraf Gerges, Joyti Zwar, Saran Chamberlain, Brenton Hordacre
{"title":"神经恢复的群体与个体治疗:系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Tharika Rodrigo, Susan Hillier, Ines Serrada, Ashraf Gerges, Joyti Zwar, Saran Chamberlain, Brenton Hordacre","doi":"10.1016/j.apmr.2025.08.007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To investigate evidence for group-based interventions compared with individual-based interventions for sensorimotor rehabilitation in adults with neurologic conditions.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>Medline, Embase, Emcare, and PsychINFO were searched from inception to July 2024.</p><p><strong>Study selection: </strong>Randomized controlled trials that compared group versus individual delivery of the same type of sensorimotor rehabilitation for adults with neurologic conditions were included.</p><p><strong>Data extraction: </strong>Two reviewers independently screened, assessed methodological quality, and extracted data. Study characteristics, participant details, intervention/control characteristics, and clinical outcomes were extracted.</p><p><strong>Data synthesis: </strong>Ten trials were included in the review. Participant groups included people with Parkinson disease (2 trials), multiple sclerosis (1 trial), and stroke (7 trials). Meta-analyses found significant effects in favor of group interventions for 6-minute walk test distance (mean difference, 36.18m; 95% CI, 14.58-57.77; P=.001), and gait speed (mean difference, 0.2m/s; 95% CI, 0.13-0.27; P<.0001). No difference was found for other clinical measures.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Group-based rehabilitation appears to deliver improved ambulation speed and distance in people with neurologic conditions. Further research is required to understand whether group-based rehabilitation has additional benefits for motivation and social support. Delivery of rehabilitation in a group appears worthy of consideration in clinical settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":8313,"journal":{"name":"Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Group Versus Individual Therapy for Neurologic Recovery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Tharika Rodrigo, Susan Hillier, Ines Serrada, Ashraf Gerges, Joyti Zwar, Saran Chamberlain, Brenton Hordacre\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.apmr.2025.08.007\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To investigate evidence for group-based interventions compared with individual-based interventions for sensorimotor rehabilitation in adults with neurologic conditions.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>Medline, Embase, Emcare, and PsychINFO were searched from inception to July 2024.</p><p><strong>Study selection: </strong>Randomized controlled trials that compared group versus individual delivery of the same type of sensorimotor rehabilitation for adults with neurologic conditions were included.</p><p><strong>Data extraction: </strong>Two reviewers independently screened, assessed methodological quality, and extracted data. Study characteristics, participant details, intervention/control characteristics, and clinical outcomes were extracted.</p><p><strong>Data synthesis: </strong>Ten trials were included in the review. Participant groups included people with Parkinson disease (2 trials), multiple sclerosis (1 trial), and stroke (7 trials). Meta-analyses found significant effects in favor of group interventions for 6-minute walk test distance (mean difference, 36.18m; 95% CI, 14.58-57.77; P=.001), and gait speed (mean difference, 0.2m/s; 95% CI, 0.13-0.27; P<.0001). No difference was found for other clinical measures.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Group-based rehabilitation appears to deliver improved ambulation speed and distance in people with neurologic conditions. Further research is required to understand whether group-based rehabilitation has additional benefits for motivation and social support. Delivery of rehabilitation in a group appears worthy of consideration in clinical settings.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8313,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-27\",\"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://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2025.08.007\",\"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://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2025.08.007","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

目的:研究以群体为基础的干预与以个体为基础的干预对神经系统疾病成人感觉运动康复的影响。数据来源:MEDLINE, Embase, Emcare和PsychINFO检索自成立至2024年7月。研究选择:随机对照试验比较了对患有神经系统疾病的成人进行相同类型的感觉运动康复治疗的群体和个体。数据提取:两名审稿人独立筛选、评估方法学质量并提取数据。提取研究特征、参与者详细信息、干预/对照特征和临床结果。数据综合:本综述纳入了10项试验。参与者包括帕金森氏症(2项试验)、多发性硬化症(1项试验)和中风(7项试验)患者。荟萃分析发现,组干预对6分钟步行测试距离(平均差36.18m; CI 95% 14.58, 57.77; p=0.001)和步态速度(平均差0.2m/s; CI 95% 0.13, 0.27)有显著影响。结论:基于组的康复似乎可以改善神经系统疾病患者的行走速度和行走距离。需要进一步的研究来了解以团体为基础的康复是否对动机和社会支持有额外的好处。在临床环境中,群体康复的交付似乎值得考虑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Group Versus Individual Therapy for Neurologic Recovery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Objective: To investigate evidence for group-based interventions compared with individual-based interventions for sensorimotor rehabilitation in adults with neurologic conditions.

Data sources: Medline, Embase, Emcare, and PsychINFO were searched from inception to July 2024.

Study selection: Randomized controlled trials that compared group versus individual delivery of the same type of sensorimotor rehabilitation for adults with neurologic conditions were included.

Data extraction: Two reviewers independently screened, assessed methodological quality, and extracted data. Study characteristics, participant details, intervention/control characteristics, and clinical outcomes were extracted.

Data synthesis: Ten trials were included in the review. Participant groups included people with Parkinson disease (2 trials), multiple sclerosis (1 trial), and stroke (7 trials). Meta-analyses found significant effects in favor of group interventions for 6-minute walk test distance (mean difference, 36.18m; 95% CI, 14.58-57.77; P=.001), and gait speed (mean difference, 0.2m/s; 95% CI, 0.13-0.27; P<.0001). No difference was found for other clinical measures.

Conclusions: Group-based rehabilitation appears to deliver improved ambulation speed and distance in people with neurologic conditions. Further research is required to understand whether group-based rehabilitation has additional benefits for motivation and social support. Delivery of rehabilitation in a group appears worthy of consideration in clinical settings.

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:604180095
Book学术官方微信