Trunk training following stroke

Virtual reality-enhanced rehabilitation for improving musculoskeletal function and recovery after trauma

Orthopedic trauma remains a critical challenge in modern healthcare, often resulting in severe mobility limitations, acute pain, and delayed recovery. Conventional rehabilitation techniques, though effective, fail to address the individualized, high-precision interventions needed for musculoskeletal injuries like fractures, joint instability, ligament tears, and muscular atrophy. Virtual reality (VR) technologies, such as Apple Vision Pro and HTC Vive Pro, offer a transformative approach by enhancing diagnostic precision, rehabilitation effectiveness, and patient engagement through interactive, immersive environments that improve clinical outcomes. These VR technologies provide real-time biomechanical data, such as joint mechanics, muscle coordination, and movement patterns, allowing clinicians to design personalized rehabilitation programs. These technologies can thus facilitate neuromuscular re-education, improve muscle proprioception, and enhance muscle coordination. Studies have shown that VR-based rehabilitation advances functional recovery, improves pain management, and reduces psychological barriers associated with immobility. VR also facilitates telemedicine, increasing accessibility for patients with geographic or mobility issues. However, while VR may provide biomechanical data, it is important to note that they fall short in accurate motion tracking, particularly in fine motor control tasks. This scoping review follows PRISMA guidelines to explore the potential of VR in orthopedic rehabilitation, analyzing its diagnostic capabilities, personalized interventions, and real-time feedback systems. Despite this, barriers remain, including regulatory challenges, limitations in haptic feedback, high cost, and patient compliance. By presenting a balanced perspective on the landscape of VR in orthopedic care, this paper emphasizes the need for rigorous clinical validation, regulatory advancements, and interdisciplinary collaboration. Ultimately, VR offers the potential to significantly improve recovery outcomes, enhance patient engagement, and streamline rehabilitation protocols, but its successful integration into clinical practice must be approached with both optimism and caution.

Hands-free Atalante exoskeleton in post-stroke gait and balance rehabilitation: a safety study

BACKGROUND

Stroke often results in gait dysfunction, impairing daily activities and quality of life. Overground robotic exoskeletons hold promise for post-stroke rehabilitation. This study primarily aimed to assess the safety of hands-free Atalante exoskeleton training in post-stroke subjects, with a secondary aim to assess gait and balance.

METHODS

Forty subjects (10.2 ± 12.1 months post-stroke) with gait dysfunction (Functional Ambulation Category [FAC] score ≤ 3) underwent five training sessions over three weeks with a hands-free exoskeleton (Atalante, Wandercraft, France). Safety, the primary outcome, was evaluated by the number and severity of adverse events (AEs), judged by an independent clinical evaluation committee (CEC). A usability test was performed during the fifth training session followed by the exoskeleton use questionnaire. Gait and balance were assessed pre/post-training via walking capacity score (FAC), gait speed by 10-meter walk test (10MWT), walked distance by 6-minute walk test (6MWT), and balance by Berg Balance Scale (BBS). Spasticity was assessed with the Modified Ashworth scale. Anxiety and depression were quantified using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Safety outcomes were analyzed using the Wilson, Lee and Dubin methods for proportions, and occurrence rates were computed. Within-group differences were compared using Wilcoxon, McNemar, and Friedman tests, with significance set at P < 0.05.

RESULTS

Thirty-one subjects completed the training sessions, while nine discontinued. The study reported two serious adverse events (SAE) (vertigo, dysarthria) and six AEs, with the CEC concluding that no SAE was linked to the device/study procedure. The average AE rate per session was 2.5 ± 1.4%, including four events possibly linked to the device/study procedure (knee pain [n = 1], skin lacerations [n = 3]), classified as negligible or minor by the CEC. A high proportion (82.6%) successfully completed the usability test and reported satisfaction (90%) on the exoskeleton use questionnaire. For gait and balance, favorable changes were observed in FAC, 10MWT, 6MWT, and BBS scores Post-training (p < 0.05, respectively). Spasticity, anxiety, and depression remained unchanged.

CONCLUSIONS

This study indicates that the hands-free Atalante exoskeleton is safe, feasible, and well-tolerated for gait and balance rehabilitation in post-stroke subjects, warranting larger randomized controlled trials to assess its efficacy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Evaluation of the Use of the Atalante Exoskeleton in Patients Presenting an Hemiplegia Due to Cerebrovascular Accident (INSPIRE) trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04694001, registered on 20201231).

Flexibility, Resistance, Aerobic, Movement Execution (FRAME) training program to improve gait capacity in adults with Hereditary Spastic Paraplegia: protocol for a single-cohort feasibility trial

Background

Hereditary Spastic Paraplegia (HSP) is a heterogeneous group of inherited neurological disorders characterized by progressive weakness and spasticity in the lower limbs, significantly affecting gait capacity (endurance and speed). Although specific interventions have been already investigated, there is currently a lack of comprehensive, structured neurorehabilitation programs to improve gait capacity in adults with HSP. Thus, this protocol aims to explore the feasibility and effectiveness of a composite training targeting flexibility, muscle strength, motor control, balance, and aerobic capacity.

Methods

20 adults diagnosed with HSP will participate in 10 to 16 therapist-guided sessions (intervention), lasting 60 to 120 minutes each, occurring once or twice weekly based on individual preferences. Depending on the number and frequency of sessions, the intervention period may vary in between five to 10 weeks. Upon completion, participants will receive a transfer package (manual, video tutorials) to stimulate long-term exercise at home. Assessments will take place before intervention (T0), at the end of the intervention (T1), and 12 weeks post-T1 (T2). Primary outcomes will focus on feasibility (recruitment, retention, adherence, absence of adverse events, and patient's satisfaction). Secondary outcomes will evaluate improvements in gait capacity and specific contributing factors such as reduced spasticity, increased muscle strength, and improved balance.

Relevance

The significance of this protocol is to provide valuable insights for clinicians regarding the feasibility and potential efficacy of a comprehensive, clinical-oriented program to improve gait capacity in adults with HSP, and inform future translational research studies in the field.

Clinical trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT06742697.

Physical rehabilitation approaches for the recovery of function and mobility following stroke

BACKGROUND

Various approaches to physical rehabilitation to improve function and mobility are used after stroke. There is considerable controversy around the relative effectiveness of approaches, and little known about optimal delivery and dose. Some physiotherapists base their treatments on a single approach; others use components from several different approaches.

OBJECTIVES

Primary objective: To determine whether physical rehabilitation is effective for recovery of function and mobility in people with stroke, and to assess if any one physical rehabilitation approach is more effective than any other approach.

SECONDARY OBJECTIVE

To explore factors that may impact the effectiveness of physical rehabilitation approaches, including time after stroke, geographical location of study, intervention dose/duration, intervention provider, and treatment components. Stakeholder involvement: Key aims were to clarify the focus of the review, inform decisions about subgroup analyses, and co-produce statements relating to key implications.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched the Cochrane Stroke Trials Register (last searched November 2022), CENTRAL (2022, Issue 10), MEDLINE (1966 to November 2022), Embase (1980 to November 2022), AMED (1985 to November 2022), CINAHL (1982 to November 2022), and the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (to November 2022).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Inclusion criteria: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of physical rehabilitation approaches aimed at promoting the recovery of function or mobility in adult participants with a clinical diagnosis of stroke.

EXCLUSION CRITERIA

RCTs of upper limb function or single treatment components.

PRIMARY OUTCOMES

measures of independence in activities of daily living (IADL) and motor function.

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

balance, gait velocity, and length of stay.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two independent authors selected studies according to pre-defined eligibility criteria, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias in the included studies. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

In this review update, we included 267 studies (21,838 participants). Studies were conducted in 36 countries, with half (133/267) in China. Generally, studies were heterogeneous, and often poorly reported. We judged only 14 studies in meta-analyses as at low risk of bias for all domains and, on average, we considered 33% of studies in analyses of primary outcomes at high risk of bias. Is physical rehabilitation more effective than no (or minimal) physical rehabilitation? Compared to no physical rehabilitation, physical rehabilitation may improve IADL (standardised mean difference (SMD) 1.32, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08 to 1.56; 52 studies, 5403 participants; low-certainty evidence) and motor function (SMD 1.01, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.22; 50 studies, 5669 participants; low-certainty evidence). There was evidence of long-term benefits for these outcomes. Physical rehabilitation may improve balance (MD 4.54, 95% CI 1.36 to 7.72; 9 studies, 452 participants; low-certainty evidence) and likely improves gait velocity (SMD 0.23, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.42; 18 studies, 1131 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), but with no evidence of long-term benefits. Is physical rehabilitation more effective than attention control? The evidence is very uncertain about the effects of physical rehabilitation, as compared to attention control, on IADL (SMD 0.91, 95% CI 0.06 to 1.75; 2 studies, 106 participants), motor function (SMD 0.13, 95% CI -0.13 to 0.38; 5 studies, 237 participants), and balance (MD 6.61, 95% CI -0.45 to 13.66; 4 studies, 240 participants). Physical rehabilitation likely improves gait speed when compared to attention control (SMD 0.34, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.54; 7 studies, 405 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Does additional physical rehabilitation improve outcomes? Additional physical rehabilitation may improve IADL (SMD 1.26, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.71; 21 studies, 1972 participants; low-certainty evidence) and motor function (SMD 0.69, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.92; 22 studies, 1965 participants; low-certainty evidence). Very few studies assessed these outcomes at long-term follow-up. Additional physical rehabilitation may improve balance (MD 5.74, 95% CI 3.78 to 7.71; 15 studies, 795 participants; low-certainty evidence) and gait velocity (SMD 0.59, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.91; 19 studies, 1004 participants; low-certainty evidence). Very few studies assessed these outcomes at long-term follow-up. Is any one approach to physical rehabilitation more effective than any other approach? Compared to other approaches, those that focus on functional task training may improve IADL (SMD 0.58, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.87; 22 studies, 1535 participants; low-certainty evidence) and motor function (SMD 0.72, 95% CI 0.21 to 1.22; 20 studies, 1671 participants; very low-certainty evidence) but the evidence in the latter is very uncertain. The benefit was sustained long-term. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of functional task training on balance (MD 2.16, 95% CI -0.24 to 4.55) and gait velocity (SMD 0.28, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.56). Compared to other approaches, neurophysiological approaches may be less effective than other approaches in improving IADL (SMD -0.34, 95% CI -0.63 to -0.06; 14 studies, 737 participants; low-certainty evidence), and there may be no difference in improving motor function (SMD -0.60, 95% CI -1.32 to 0.12; 13 studies, 663 participants; low-certainty evidence), balance (MD -0.60, 95% CI -5.90 to 6.03; 9 studies, 292 participants; low-certainty evidence), and gait velocity (SMD -0.17, 95% CI -0.62 to 0.27; 16 studies, 630 participants; very low-certainty evidence), but the evidence is very uncertain about the effect on gait velocity. For all comparisons, the evidence is very uncertain about the effects of physical rehabilitation on adverse events and length of hospital stay.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Physical rehabilitation, using a mix of different treatment components, likely improves recovery of function and mobility after stroke. Additional physical rehabilitation, delivered as an adjunct to 'usual' rehabilitation, may provide added benefits. Physical rehabilitation approaches that focus on functional task training may be useful. Neurophysiological approaches to physical rehabilitation may be no different from, or less effective than, other physical rehabilitation approaches. Certainty in this evidence is limited due to substantial heterogeneity, with mainly small studies and important differences between study populations and interventions. We feel it is unlikely that any studies published since November 2022 would alter our conclusions. Given the size of this review, future updates warrant consensus discussion amongst stakeholders to ensure the most relevant questions are explored for optimal decision-making.

The Impact of Trunk Function and Lower Limb Paralysis on Independence in Activities of Daily Living Among Stroke Patients

BACKGROUND

 Stroke is a major global health issue, and many patients experience motor paralysis and sensory impairments that affect their independence in the activities of daily living (ADLs). Trunk and lower limb functions are crucial in poststroke ADL independence. Although these two functions are closely related, a few studies have evaluated them in combination, and the importance of assessment methods that consider their mutual relationship has not been thoroughly examined. In this study, we aimed to clarify the degree to which trunk function and lower limb paralysis impact ADL independence when evaluated individually versus in combination, through a hierarchical regression analysis, and to verify the significance of the combined assessment of both functions.

METHODS

 This cross-sectional study included 51 patients with first-ever stroke and hemiplegia. Trunk function was assessed using the Trunk Impairment Scale, lower limb paralysis was evaluated using the Brunnstrom recovery stage for the lower extremities, and ADL independence was measured using the Functional Independence Measure. Hierarchical regression analysis was conducted to examine the impact of trunk and lower limb functions on ADL independence.

RESULTS

 Across two regression models, the assessment of trunk and lower limb function in combination significantly improved the accuracy in reflecting ADL independence compared with the assessment of each function individually (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

 The combined evaluation method, which assesses both trunk function and lower limb motor paralysis, more accurately reflected ADL independence, suggesting its usefulness as an assessment method in the rehabilitation of patients with stroke.

The effectiveness of core stability exercises on functional outcomes in early subacute stroke recovery: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The core is important in providing local strength and balance and is central to almost all kinetic chains of daily activities.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of additional Core Stability Exercises (CSE) to conventional physiotherapy (CP) versus CP alone to improve dynamic sitting balance, coordination, trunk function, and stepping (gait) as a primary outcome and functional sitting balance, postural control, standing balance and fall risk, lower limb spasticity, activities of daily living, degree of disability, and quality of life for early subacute stroke recovery.

METHODS

A multicentre parallel, randomized, controlled, assessor-blinded trial was conducted. Eighty-seven early stroke survivors initiated (≤30 days) were divided into two groups. Experimental group (EG) performed CSE in addition to CP and the control group (CG) performed CP alone for 5-day/week for 5-week. Outcomes were assessed at the beginning and end of the intervention (5-week) and follow-up (12-week). Quality of life was assessed at 5-week and 12- week. Variables were analyzed using a repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA), with Bonferroni's post-hoc test. All statistical tests were performed for 0.05 significance level and 95% confidence interval.

RESULTS

Eighty-three individuals were analyzed 40 in the EG and 43 in the CG. Differences between groups were shown favoring EG regarding dynamic sitting balance, trunk coordination/function (Spanish-Trunk Impairment Scale), lower limb spasticity (modified-Ashworth Scale) and balance (Spanish-Postural Assessment Scale). No differences were observed for the other outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

CSE in addition to CP improves dynamic sitting balance, trunk coordination/function, lower-limb spasticity, and balance in early recovery post-stroke.

Influence of Impaired Upper Extremity Motor Function on Static Balance in People with Chronic Stroke

BACKGROUND

Stroke is a leading cause of disability, especially due to an increased fall risk and postural instability. The objective of this study was to analyze the impact of motor impairment in the hemiparetic UE on static balance in standing, in subject with chronic stroke.

METHODS

Seventy adults with chronic stroke, capable of independent standing and walking, participated in this cross-sectional study. The exclusion criteria included vestibular, cerebellar, or posterior cord lesions. The participants were classified based on their UE impairment using the Fugl-Meyer Assessment of Motor Recovery after Stroke (FMA-UE). A posturographic evaluation (mCTSIB) was performed in the standing position to analyze the center of pressure (COP) displacement in the mediolateral (ML) and anteroposterior (AP) axes and its mean speed with eyes open (OE) and closed (EC) on stable and unstable surfaces.

RESULTS

A strong and significant correlation (r = -0.53; p < 0.001) was observed between the mediolateral (ML) center of pressure (COP) oscillation and the FMA-UE, which was particularly strong with eyes closed [r(EO) = 0.5; r(EC) = 0.54]. The results of the multiple linear regression analysis indicated that the ML oscillation is influenced significantly by the FMA-Motor, and specifically by the sections on UE, wrist, coordination/speed, and sensation.

CONCLUSIONS

The hemiparetic UE motor capacity is strongly related to the ML COP oscillation during standing in individuals with chronic stroke, with a lower motor capacity associated with a greater instability. Understanding these relationships underpins the interventions to improve balance and reduce falls in people who have had a stroke.

Effect of a Home-Base Core Stability Exercises in Hereditary Ataxia. A Randomized Controlled Trial. A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Core stability exercises (CSE) have been shown to be effective in improving trunk function in several neurological diseases, but the evidence is scarce on Hereditary Ataxias (HA).

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of a 5-week home-based CSE program in terms of ataxia severity, trunk function, balance confidence, gait speed, lower limb motor function, quality of life, health status and falls rate in HA individuals at short- and long-term.

METHODS

This is an assessor-blind randomized controlled clinical trial parallel group 1:1. The individuals were divided in experimental group (EG) performed standard care in addition to CSE, and control group (CG) performed standard care alone. The CSE home-program was conducted 1-h/day, 5-day/week for 5-week. The assessment was performed at baseline, endpoint (5-week), and follow-up (10-week). The primary outcomes were ataxia severity assessed by the Scale for the Assessment and Rating of Ataxia and trunk function assessed by Spanish-version of Trunk Impairment Scale 2.0. The secondary outcomes were balance confidence assessed by Activities-specific Balance Confidence (ABC), gait speed by 4-meter walk test (4-MWT), the lower limb motor function by 30-s sit-to-stand, quality of life by EuroQol 5-dimension 5-level (EQ-5D-5L), health-status by EQ-5D and falls rate.

RESULTS

Twenty-three HA individuals were recruited (51.8 ± 11.10 years). Statistically significant group-time interaction was shown in ABC (F:5.539; P = 0.007), EQ-5D-5L Total (F:4.836; P = 0.013), EQ 5D (F:7.207; P = 0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

No statistical differences between groups for ataxia severity and trunk function were observed. However, were differences for balance confidence, gait speed, quality of life, and falls rate in HA individuals.

Therapists and patients perceptions of a mixed reality system designed to improve trunk control and upper extremity function

A prototype system aimed at improving arm function and trunk control after stroke has been developed that combines mixed-reality (MR) feedback with a mobile seat system (Holoreach). The purpose of this study was to assess the usability of Holoreach in a rehabilitation setting from both the patient and therapist perspective. Ten therapists (eight physiotherapists and two occupational therapists) used the device in their regular therapy programs for fifteen stroke patients with trunk control issues. Each patient received four individual therapy sessions with the device performed under the supervision of the therapist. Therapists and patients kept therapy diaries and used customized questionnaires. At the end of the study two focus groups were conducted to further assess usability. Generally, the prototype system is suitable for training trunk and arm control. The therapists expressed overall positive views on the impact of Holoreach. They characterized it as new, motivating, fresh, joyful, interesting, and exciting. All therapists and 80% of the patients agreed with the statement that training with Holoreach is beneficial for rehabilitation. Nonetheless, improvements are required in the hardware and software, and design. The prototype system contributes at various levels to the rapidly evolving advances in neurorehabilitation, particularly regarding the practical aspect of exercise delivery.

Is trunk training effective at improving ability in activities of daily living and function of people who have had a stroke? A Cochrane Review summary with commentary

BACKGROUND

Effective trunk control is an essential component of sitting and standing balance, and is a key requirement for movement of the head and limbs, and for carrying out functional tasks. A stroke can result in impaired trunk control, affected by stroke-related deficits in balance, muscle function, coordination and position sense. Recovery of trunk control is recognised as a key goal of stroke rehabilitation.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of trunk training interventions in people with stroke.

METHODS

A summary of the Cochrane Review by Thijs et al. (2023), with comments from a rehabilitation perspective.

RESULTS

68 studies (2585 participants) were included in the Cochrane review. Trunk training was not found to have any benefit on measures of ADL, when compared to other dose-matched therapies, but did improve trunk function and other outcomes. Trunk training was more beneficial than non-dose-matched therapies for measures of ADL, trunk function, and other outcomes. The certainty of these findings is very low.

CONCLUSION

Evidence supports the use of trunk training as part of stroke rehabilitation. However certainty in these findings is very low due to volume, quality and heterogeneity of the evidence.