Diego Longo, Marco Baccini, Giulio Cherubini, Aurora Caporaso, Mario De Marco, Angela Politi, Guido Santini, Francesca Cecchi, Maria Angela Bagni
{"title":"紧张性拉伸反射阈值(TSRT)的度量特性作为痉挛的测量:系统回顾与荟萃分析。","authors":"Diego Longo, Marco Baccini, Giulio Cherubini, Aurora Caporaso, Mario De Marco, Angela Politi, Guido Santini, Francesca Cecchi, Maria Angela Bagni","doi":"10.33393/aop.2025.3428","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Spasticity is a common symptom after brain injury, often interfering with functional recovery and rehabilitation. The Tonic Stretch Reflex Threshold (TSRT) was proposed as an objective neurophysiological assessment of spasticity that could overcome the limitations of clinical scales. This systematic review aimed to appraise the current evidence on the metric properties of TSRT.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Electronic databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, and EMBASE) were screened from inception to June 30, 2025, for studies reporting data on reliability, validity, and/or responsiveness of TSRT in adults with stroke. Two reviewers independently selected the studies, assessed the methodological quality, and extracted relevant data. When possible, pooled estimates for each property were computed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 9804 titles retrieved, 17 were eventually included, to which 2 articles from cross-references were added. We found insufficient values for both intra-rater (two studies, ICC = 0.548, 0.330-0.710) and inter-rater (three studies, ICC = 0.687, 0.511-0.808) reliability, with high measurement error. Data on validity were found in 14 articles, with conflicting results on the association of TSRT with clinical scales of spasticity and motricity, but good ability to discriminate among relevant groups. Only one study investigated responsiveness with an external anchor, finding that TSRT measurements failed to accurately detect improved participants.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Despite the potential of TSRT as a measure of spasticity, its metric properties, particularly reliability, are not fully supported. Future research should prioritize improving its reliability and investigating its validity and responsiveness with neurophysiological measures rather than relying solely on clinical scales.</p>","PeriodicalId":72290,"journal":{"name":"Archives of physiotherapy","volume":"15 ","pages":"250-264"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12451295/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Metric properties of the Tonic Stretch Reflex Threshold (TSRT) as a measure of spasticity: a systematic review with meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Diego Longo, Marco Baccini, Giulio Cherubini, Aurora Caporaso, Mario De Marco, Angela Politi, Guido Santini, Francesca Cecchi, Maria Angela Bagni\",\"doi\":\"10.33393/aop.2025.3428\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Spasticity is a common symptom after brain injury, often interfering with functional recovery and rehabilitation. The Tonic Stretch Reflex Threshold (TSRT) was proposed as an objective neurophysiological assessment of spasticity that could overcome the limitations of clinical scales. This systematic review aimed to appraise the current evidence on the metric properties of TSRT.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Electronic databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, and EMBASE) were screened from inception to June 30, 2025, for studies reporting data on reliability, validity, and/or responsiveness of TSRT in adults with stroke. Two reviewers independently selected the studies, assessed the methodological quality, and extracted relevant data. When possible, pooled estimates for each property were computed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 9804 titles retrieved, 17 were eventually included, to which 2 articles from cross-references were added. We found insufficient values for both intra-rater (two studies, ICC = 0.548, 0.330-0.710) and inter-rater (three studies, ICC = 0.687, 0.511-0.808) reliability, with high measurement error. Data on validity were found in 14 articles, with conflicting results on the association of TSRT with clinical scales of spasticity and motricity, but good ability to discriminate among relevant groups. Only one study investigated responsiveness with an external anchor, finding that TSRT measurements failed to accurately detect improved participants.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Despite the potential of TSRT as a measure of spasticity, its metric properties, particularly reliability, are not fully supported. Future research should prioritize improving its reliability and investigating its validity and responsiveness with neurophysiological measures rather than relying solely on clinical scales.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72290,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Archives of physiotherapy\",\"volume\":\"15 \",\"pages\":\"250-264\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12451295/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Archives of physiotherapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.33393/aop.2025.3428\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of physiotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33393/aop.2025.3428","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
简介:痉挛是脑损伤后的常见症状,经常干扰功能恢复和康复。紧张性拉伸反射阈值(TSRT)被提出作为一种客观的神经生理评估痉挛,可以克服临床量表的局限性。本系统综述旨在评价目前关于TSRT度量特性的证据。方法:从研究开始到2025年6月30日,对电子数据库(MEDLINE、CINAHL、Scopus、Web of Science和EMBASE)进行筛选,以报告成人脑卒中患者TSRT的可靠性、有效性和/或反应性数据。两名审稿人独立选择研究,评估方法学质量,并提取相关数据。在可能的情况下,计算每个属性的汇总估计值。结果:在9804篇检索标题中,最终纳入17篇,其中2篇来自交叉参考文献。我们发现评分者内(2项研究,ICC = 0.548, 0.330-0.710)和评分者间(3项研究,ICC = 0.687, 0.511-0.808)的信度值均不足,测量误差较大。在14篇文章中发现了效度数据,关于TSRT与痉挛和运动性临床量表的关联的结果相互矛盾,但在相关组之间具有良好的区分能力。只有一项研究调查了外部锚点的反应性,发现TSRT测量不能准确地检测到改善的参与者。结论:尽管TSRT作为一种测量痉挛的潜在方法,但其度量特性,特别是可靠性,尚未得到充分支持。未来的研究应优先提高其可靠性,并通过神经生理测量来研究其有效性和反应性,而不是仅仅依赖于临床量表。
Metric properties of the Tonic Stretch Reflex Threshold (TSRT) as a measure of spasticity: a systematic review with meta-analysis.
Introduction: Spasticity is a common symptom after brain injury, often interfering with functional recovery and rehabilitation. The Tonic Stretch Reflex Threshold (TSRT) was proposed as an objective neurophysiological assessment of spasticity that could overcome the limitations of clinical scales. This systematic review aimed to appraise the current evidence on the metric properties of TSRT.
Methods: Electronic databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, and EMBASE) were screened from inception to June 30, 2025, for studies reporting data on reliability, validity, and/or responsiveness of TSRT in adults with stroke. Two reviewers independently selected the studies, assessed the methodological quality, and extracted relevant data. When possible, pooled estimates for each property were computed.
Results: Of the 9804 titles retrieved, 17 were eventually included, to which 2 articles from cross-references were added. We found insufficient values for both intra-rater (two studies, ICC = 0.548, 0.330-0.710) and inter-rater (three studies, ICC = 0.687, 0.511-0.808) reliability, with high measurement error. Data on validity were found in 14 articles, with conflicting results on the association of TSRT with clinical scales of spasticity and motricity, but good ability to discriminate among relevant groups. Only one study investigated responsiveness with an external anchor, finding that TSRT measurements failed to accurately detect improved participants.
Conclusion: Despite the potential of TSRT as a measure of spasticity, its metric properties, particularly reliability, are not fully supported. Future research should prioritize improving its reliability and investigating its validity and responsiveness with neurophysiological measures rather than relying solely on clinical scales.