1. Timing and Dose of Upper Limb Motor Intervention After Stroke: A Systematic Review
- Author
-
Nick S. Ward, Natasha A. Lannin, Geoffrey Cloud, Venesha Rethnam, Emily J Dalton, Dale Corbett, Sharon F Kramer, Laura Jolliffe, Amy Brodtmann, Kathryn S Hayward, Gemma R Hughes, Tina Kaffenberger, Julie Bernhardt, Vincent Thijs, and Leonid Churilov
- Subjects
Advanced and Specialized Nursing ,medicine.medical_specialty ,business.industry ,medicine.medical_treatment ,Stroke Rehabilitation ,Psychological intervention ,Recovery of Function ,medicine.disease ,Time-to-Treatment ,Upper Extremity ,Systematic review ,medicine.anatomical_structure ,Sample size determination ,Interquartile range ,Intervention (counseling) ,medicine ,Physical therapy ,Humans ,Upper limb ,Neurology (clinical) ,Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine ,Stroke recovery ,business ,Stroke - Abstract
This systematic review aimed to investigate timing, dose, and efficacy of upper limb intervention during the first 6 months poststroke. Three online databases were searched up to July 2020. Titles/abstracts/full-text were reviewed independently by 2 authors. Randomized and nonrandomized studies that enrolled people within the first 6 months poststroke, aimed to improve upper limb recovery, and completed preintervention and postintervention assessments were included. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane reporting tools. Studies were examined by timing (recovery epoch), dose, and intervention type. Two hundred and sixty-one studies were included, representing 228 (n=9704 participants) unique data sets. The number of studies completed increased from one (n=37 participants) between 1980 and 1984 to 91 (n=4417 participants) between 2015 and 2019. Timing of intervention start has not changed (median 38 days, interquartile range [IQR], 22–66) and study sample size remains small (median n=30, IQR 20–48). Most studies were rated high risk of bias (62%). Study participants were enrolled at different recovery epochs: 1 hyperacute (
- Published
- 2021