Environmental enrichment for stroke and other non-progressive brain injury

Environmental Enrichment in Stroke Research: an Update

Environmental enrichment (EE) refers to different forms of stimulation, where the environment is designed to improve the levels of sensory, cognitive, and motor stimuli, inducing stroke recovery in animal models. Stroke is a leading cause of mortality and neurological disability among older adults, hence the importance of developing strategies to improve recovery for such patients. This review provides an update on recent findings, compiling information regarding the parameters affected by EE exposure in both preclinical and clinical studies. During stroke recovery, EE exposure has been shown to improve both the cognitive and locomotor aspects, inducing important neuroplastic alterations, increased angiogenesis and neurogenesis, and modified gene expression, among other effects. There is a need for further research in this field, particularly in those aspects where the evidence is inconclusive. Moreover, it is necessary refine and adapt the EE paradigms for application in human patients.

Efficacy of an environmental enrichment intervention for endometriosis: a pilot study

Introduction

We have previously shown that Environmental Enrichment (EE), a multi-modal psychosocial intervention consisting of increased social interaction, novelty, and open spaces, improved disease presentation, anxiety, and immune-related disturbances in the rat model of endometriosis. However, there is a knowledge gap regarding the effects of EE interventions in patients with this painful, inflammatory chronic disease.

Aim

To adapt and test the efficacy of an EE intervention on pelvic pain, mental health, perceived stress, quality of life, and systemic inflammation in endometriosis patients through a randomized clinical trial (RCT).

Materials and methods

A multidisciplinary team with expertise in physiology, neuroscience, psychology, and women's health adapted and implemented a two-arm RCT comparing an EE intervention with a wait-list control group. Six EE modules administered on alternate weeks were provided to patients in the intervention (N = 29); controls received education only. Survey data and biospecimens were collected at baseline, end-of-study, and 3-months post-intervention to assess pain (Brief Pain Inventory, BPI), endometriosis-related quality of life-QoL (Endometriosis Health Profile-30, EHP30), anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7, GAD7), depression (Patient Health Questionnaire for Depression 8, PHQ8), pain catastrophizing (Pain Catastrophizing Score, PCS), stress (Perceived Stress Scale-14, PSS14), and saliva cortisol levels (AM, PM).

Results

Compared to the wait-list controls, participants in the EE intervention showed significantly decreased GAD-7 scores at the end of the intervention and 3-month follow-up. Depression, perceived stress, and QoL improved at the 3-month follow-up compared to baseline. While pain levels did not improve, they significantly correlated with anxiety, depression, QoL and pain catastrophizing scores.

Conclusion

This pilot RCT demonstrated significant improvements in anxiety and depressive symptoms, QoL, and perceived stress, supporting enriched environments as an integrative psychosocial intervention to be used as adjuvant to the standard of care for endometriosis pain.

Impact of the built environment on stroke inpatient rehabilitation

Guidance recommends that people with disability following stroke should receive rehabilitation in a dedicated stroke inpatient unit. Previous research has indicated that aspects of the built environment in inpatient settings can impact on patient wellbeing and experience. This article evaluates and discusses the findings of a recent systematic review that explores the effect of environmental and design factors on stroke rehabilitation.

Environmental enrichment for stroke and other non-progressive brain injury

BACKGROUND

Rehabilitation is effective for recovery after stroke and other non-progressive brain injuries but it is unclear if the rehabilitation environment itself, outside of limited therapy hours, is maximally conducive to recovery. Environmental enrichment is a relatively new concept within rehabilitation for humans. In this review, this is defined as an intervention designed to facilitate physical (motor and sensory), cognitive and social activity by the provision of equipment and organisation of a structured, stimulating environment. The environment should be designed to encourage (but not force) activities without additional specialised rehabilitation input.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of environmental enrichment on well-being, functional recovery, activity levels and quality of life in people who have stroke or non-progressive brain injury.

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted the search on 26 October 2020. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE (from 1950); Embase (from 1980); the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL; from 1982); the Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED; from 1985); PsycINFO (from 1806); the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro; from 1999); and 10 additional bibliographic databases and ongoing trial registers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We planned to include randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared environmental enrichment with standard services.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed eligible studies, extracted data, and assessed study quality. Any disagreements were resolved through discussion with a third review author. We determined the risk of bias for the included study and performed a 'best evidence' synthesis using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified one RCT, involving 53 participants with stroke, comparing environmental enrichment (which included physical, cognitive and social activities such as reading material, board and card games, gaming technology, music, artwork, and computer with Internet) with standard services in an inpatient rehabilitation setting. We excluded five studies, found two studies awaiting classification and one ongoing study which described environmental enrichment in their interventions. Of the excluded studies, three were non-RCTs and two described co-interventions with a significant component of rehabilitation. Based on the single small included RCT at high risk of bias, data are insufficient to provide any reliable indication of benefit or risk to guide clinical practice in terms of the provision of environmental enrichment.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The gap in current research should not, however, be interpreted as proof that environmental enrichment is ineffective. Further research is needed with robust study designs, such as cluster RCTs, and consistent outcome measurement evaluating the effectiveness of environmental enrichment in different settings (inpatient versus outpatient), the relative effectiveness of various components of environmental enrichment, cost-effectiveness, and safety of the intervention in people following stroke or other non-progressive brain injuries. It should be noted, however, that it is challenging to randomise or double-blind trials of environmental enrichment given the nature of the intervention.