Search

Introduction COVID-19 infection significantly increased mortality risk and the burden of disability in most survivors, regardless of symptom severity at onset. The rehabilitation needs of people infected are receiving growing attention, as evidenced by the increasing number of publications, including those addressing the chronic consequences of infection. This rapid living systematic review reports the evidence published in November and December 2020 and summarises the entire body of literature on rehabilitation in COVID-19 patients published in 2020. Evidence acquisition This update was performed using the methodology reported by the second edition conducted by Cochrane Rehabilitation REH-COVER Action. We searched PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, and Pedro databases. Papers related to COVID-19 and rehabilitation were retrieved and summarised descriptively. Evidence synthesis The search retrieved 4441 studies. After the removal of duplicates and the screening for title and abstract, we retained 105 studies. Of these, we included 54 in the qualitative synthesis of this update. According to OCEBM 2011 levels of evidence table, most studies (64.8%) fall within the category of level 4 evidence. Up to 40.7% of papers included COVID-19 patients in the postacute phase. In 2020, our rapid living systematic review included 230 studies; most of these (73.9%) were level 4 studies, 25.7% were level 3, and only one study was level 2. The evidence level improved over time. While most studies (44.8%) included patients with acute COVID-19, we observed a gradual increase in the number of reports about chronic symptoms and the long-term consequences of the infection. Conclusions The update of the rapid living systematic review by Cochrane Rehabilitation Field demonstrates an increase in the level of evidence of studies addressing the rehabilitation needs associated with COVID-19 infection. Although most studies are still case reports/series, there is a trend towards conducting prospective investigations of the early natural history of the disease (first months post onset). High-quality-level studies on the efficacy of rehabilitation, and long-term monitoring of the disease and its sequelae are yet to emerge.

Background: A monthly systematic review update is carried out to maintain the currency of scientific literature on rehabilitation of patients with COVID-19 and/or describing consequences due to the disease and its treatment, as they relate to limitations in functioning of rehabilitation interest. Objectives: To provide an updated summary of the available evidence published in August 2020. Methods: An extensive search on the main medical literature databases from August 1st, 2020 to August 31st, 2020 was performed, according to the methodology described in the second edition of the Cochrane Rehabilitation 2020 rapid living systematic review. Results: After removing duplicates, 1136 papers were identified, and 51 studies were finally included. According to OCEBM 2011 Levels of Evidence Table, they were Level 4 in most cases (76.5%) and Level 3 in the remaining (23.5%). Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were not found. Thirty-two studies (62.7%) included COVID-19 patients who were assessed in the acute (20/32) or post-acute phases (12/32). The other studies reported data on the impact of COVID-19 infection (7/19) or on the effect of lockdown restrictions (12/19) on subjects with pre-existing health conditions. Conclusions: The scientific literature of August 2020 mainly focused on limitations in functioning of nervous system structure and related functions. Albeit the increased availability of data from analytical studies (both cohort and cross-sectional), there is still a lack of well-.conductedLevel 2 studies, to improve the knowledge on the effects of rehabilitation in COVID-19 patients. ispartof: European Journal Of Physical And Rehabilitation Medicine vol:56 issue:6 pages:839-845 ispartof: location:Italy status: Published online

Background: The COVID-19 outbreak response requires identifying and understanding the longterm consequences of this new pathology, and how to manage these. This living systematic review presents the most current and seminal information coming from the scientific literature. It is the monthly update of the second edition of the rapid living systematic review 2020 conducted by Cochrane Rehabilitation REH-COVER Action Steering Committee. Objective: The aim of this review is to update the monthly COVID-19 and rehabilitation literature research up to September 30th, 2020. Methods: Methodology described in the second edition of the rapid living systematic review 2020 conducted by Cochrane Rehabilitation REH-COVER Action was applied. The most important medical databases were searched, and papers related to COVID19 and rehabilitation were retrieved and summarized descriptively. Results: The database search retrieved 2526 publications. Duplicates were removed, and 1150 unique records were screened for inclusion. After screening titles, abstracts and full-texts, 37 papers were included in the present review. According to OCEBM 2011 Levels of Evidence Table, most studies (78.4%) fall within the level of evidence 4 category, while the remainder (22.6%) are categorized as level of evidence 3. Most studies described patients in acute (51.4%) or subacute (35.0%) phase, while no studies described the chronic consequences of COVID-19. Just one study dealt with rehabilitation interventions regarding COVID-19, and two discussed reorganization of rehabilitative services. Conclusions: The most recently published COVID-19 research focuses more on describing the clinical presentations and the natural history of the pathology, rather than rehabilitation interventions or service delivery. Studies with high levels of evidence regarding the efficacy of interventions, longterm monitoring, or new organization models remain lacking. ispartof: European Journal Of Physical And Rehabilitation Medicine vol:56 issue:6 pages:846-852 ispartof: location:Italy status: Published online

Introduction: This paper is the first update of the second edition of the rapid living systematic review on the latest scientific literature informing rehabilitation of patients with COVID-19 and/or describing consequences of the disease and its treatment, as they relate to limitations in functioning of rehabilitation interest. The aim of this study was to report data of a systematic search performed on papers published in July 2020. Evidence acquisition: The methodology described in the second edition of the rapid living systematic review was applied to search eligible papers included in the databases between July 1, 2020 and July 31, 2020. Evidence synthesis: Eight-hundred-ninety-two papers were identified through database searching (after removal of duplicates); of these, only 23 studies were included. According to OCEBM 2011 Levels of Evidence Table, they were level 3 in 30.5% cases and level 4 in 69.5%. No RCT was found. Nineteen papers studied COVID-19 patients, assessed in the acute (10 studies), post-acute (8 studies) and chronic phase (one study). Four studies reported data on the impact of COVID-19 on subjects with pre-existing health conditions. Conclusions: The current literature production still focuses more on describing all the possible aspects and complications of the pathology than on interventions or new organization models to deal with it. Albeit evidence on handling COVID-19 from a rehabilitative point of view is improving each month, further studies are still mandatory to report the role of rehabilitation in this scenario. ispartof: European Journal Of Physical And Rehabilitation Medicine vol:56 issue:5 pages:652-657 ispartof: location:Italy status: published

BACKGROUND: Pain is often experienced by patients with functional dystonia and idiopathic cervical dystonia and is likely to be determined by different neural mechanisms. OBJECTIVE: In this exploratory study, we tested the sensory-discriminative and cognitive-emotional component of pain in patients with functional and idiopathic dystonia. METHODS: Ten patients with idiopathic cervical dystonia, 12 patients with functional dystonia, and 16 age- and sex-matched healthy controls underwent psychophysical testing of tactile and pain thresholds and pain tolerance. We delivered electrical pulses of increasing intensity to the index finger of each hand and the halluces of each foot. Pain threshold and pain tolerance were respectively defined as the (1) intensity at which sensation changed from unpainful to faintly painful and (2) intensity at which painful sensation was intolerable. RESULTS: No differences were found between the three groups for tactile and pain thresholds assessed in hands and feet. Pain tolerance was significantly increased in all body regions only in functional dystonia. Patients with continuous functional dystonia had higher pain tolerance compared to subjects with paroxysmal functional dystonia and idiopathic cervical dystonia. There was no correlation between pain tolerance and pain scores, depression, anxiety, disease duration, and motor disability in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with functional dystonia have a dissociation between the sensory-discriminative and cognitive-emotional components of pain, as revealed by normal pain thresholds and increased pain tolerance. Abnormal connectivity between the motor and limbic systems might account for abnormal pain processing in functional dystonia. © 2018 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.

To assess over a period of 9 months in a sample of Italian Parkinson’s disease (PD) patients reasons leading the neurologist to modify dopaminergic treatment and patients’ causes of dissatisfaction with ongoing therapy. To evaluate the influence of disease severity on therapy persistence. A disease severity balanced sample of PD patients with stable anti-parkinsonian drugs (APD) treatment was enrolled and evaluated every 3 months. Patients requiring APD treatment modifications were discontinued from the study. The probability to modify APD treatment is greater for higher motor (UPDRS scores) and non-motor symptoms (NMSS score) severity. Both from neurologist’s and patient’s perspective, motor symptoms were the main determinants underlying APD treatment modifications. Non-motor symptoms were cause of dissatisfaction with ongoing APD treatment for 52 % of the patients, while only 36 % of the neurologists considered these as valid reasons for therapy change. REASON is the first study in PD patients that prospectively examined reasons driving APD treatment changes. Results show that the disease severity significantly increases the probability of APD treatment change. Patients attribute greater relevance than neurologists to non-motor symptoms as reason requiring treatment changes. This confirms that patient and neurologist perceptions only partially overlap.

Information about patients' adherence to therapy represents a primary issue in Parkinson's disease (PD) management. To perform the linguistic validation of the Italian version of the self-rated 8-Item Morisky Medical Adherence Scale (MMAS-8) and to describe in a sample of Italian patients affected by PD the adherence to anti-Parkinson drug therapy and the association between adherence and some socio-demographic and clinical features. MMAS-8 was translated into Italian language by two independent Italian mother-tongue translators. The consensus version was then back-translated by an English mother-tongue translator. This translation process was followed by a consensus meeting between the authors of translation and investigators and then by two comprehension tests. The translated version of the MMAS-8 scale was then administered at the baseline visit of the "REASON" study (Italian Study on the Therapy Management in Parkinson's disease: Motor, Non-Motor, Adherence and Quality Of Life Factors) in a large sample of PD patients. The final version of the MMAS-8 was easily understood. Mean ± SD MMAS-8 score was 6.1 ± 1.2. There were no differences in adherence to therapy in relationship to disease severity, gender, educational level or decision to change therapy. The Italian version of MMAS-8, the key tool of the REASON study to assess the adherence to therapy, has shown to be understandable to patients with PD. Patients enrolled in the REASON study showed medium therapy adherence.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the association between clinical and socio-demographic features and anti-Parkinson drug (APD) treatment modifications in patients with PD and to describe neurologist and patient opinions regarding the need for changes in APD therapy. METHODS: Subjects with PD with stable APD treatment over ≥3 months prior to baseline were enrolled and evaluated for socio-demographic data, disability, disease severity and neurologist and patient views on the need to modify APD treatment. RESULTS: 775 Patients were included, 51% with Hoehn and Yahr (HY) stage 1-2 (early PD) and 49% with HY stage 2.5-4 (advanced PD). Neurologists modified APD treatment in 255 patients, 97 (25%) early PD and 158 (41%; p < 0.0001) advanced PD. APD modification was strongly associated with a low educational level and UPDRS part IV score. The most common reasons behind the APD therapy changes among neurologists were presence/worsening of motor or non-motor symptoms (88% and 37% of subjects respectively). Out of 216 patients, 92% and 51% were willing to undergo APD changes to therapy because of the presence/worsening of motor or non-motor symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Neurologist decision to change APD therapy and patients reasons for dissatisfaction with it can be prevalently attributed to the presence/worsening of motor symptoms and motor fluctuations in the advanced stages. Non-motor symptoms were considered more often by patients. The patient educational level played a key role in treatment decision.

BACKGROUND: Gait impairments are common disabling symptoms of Parkinson’s disease (PD). Among the approaches for gait rehabilitation, interest in robotic devices has grown in recent years. However, the effectiveness compared to other interventions, the optimum amount of training, the type of device, and which patients might benefit most remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review about the effects on gait of robot-assisted gait training (RAGT) in PD patients and to provide advice for clinical practice. METHODS: A search was performed on PubMed, Scopus, PEDro, Cochrane library, Web of science, and guideline databases, following PRISMA guidelines. We included English articles if they used a robotic system with details about the intervention, the parameters, and the outcome measures. We evaluated the level and quality of evidence. RESULTS: We included twenty papers out of 230 results: two systematic reviews, 9 randomized controlled trials, 4 uncontrolled studies, and 5 descriptive reports. Nine studies used an exoskeleton device and the remainders end-effector robots, with large variability in terms of subjects’ disease-related disability. CONCLUSIONS: RAGT showed benefits on gait and no adverse events were recorded. However, it does not seem superior to other interventions, except in patients with more severe symptoms and advanced disease.

INTRODUCTION: There is growing evidence on the efficacy of gait robotic rehabilitation in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS), but most of the studies have focused on gait parameters. Moreover, clear indications on the clinical use of robotics still lack. As part of the CICERONE Italian Consensus on Robotic Rehabilitation, the aim of this systematic review was to investigate the existing evidence concerning the role of lower limb robotic rehabilitation in improving functional recovery in patients with MS. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We searched for and systematically reviewed evidence-based studies on gait robotic rehabilitation in MS, between January 1st, 2010 and December 31st, 2020, in the following databases: Cochrane Library, PEDro, PubMed and Google Scholar. The study quality was assessed by the 16-item assessment of multiple systematic reviews 2 (AMSTAR 2) and the 10-item PEDro scale for the other research studies. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: After an accurate screening, only 17 papers were included in the review, and most of them (13 RCT) had a level II evidence. Most of the studies used the Lokomat as a grounded robotic device, two investigated the efficacy of end-effectors and two powered exoskeletons. Generally speaking, robotic treatment has beneficial effects on gait speed, endurance and balance with comparable outcomes to those of conventional treatments. However, in more severe patients (EDSS >6), robotics leads to better functional outcomes. Notably, after gait training with robotics (especially when coupled to virtual reality) MS patients also reach better non-motor outcomes, including spasticity, fatigue, pain, psychological well-being and quality of life. Unfortunately, no clinical indications emerge on the treatment protocols. CONCLUSIONS: The present comprehensive systematic review highlights the potential beneficial role on functional outcomes of the lower limb robotic devices in people with MS. Future studies are warranted to evaluate the role of robotics not only for walking and balance outcomes, but also for other gait-training-related benefits, to identify appropriate outcome measures related to a specific subgroup of MS subjects' disease severity.

Introduction Stroke is the third leading cause of adult disability world-wide, and lower extremity motor impairment is one of the major determinants of long-term disability. Although robotic therapy is becoming more and more utilized in research protocols for lower limb stroke rehabilitation, the gap between research evidence and its use in clinical practice is still significant. The aim of this study was to determine the scope, quality, and consistency of guidelines for robotic lower limb rehabilitation after stroke, in order to provide clinical recommendations. Evidence acquisition We systematically reviewed stroke rehabilitation guideline recommendations between January 1st, 2010 and October 31th, 2020. We explored electronic databases (n=4), guideline repositories and professional rehabilitation networks (n=12). Two independent reviewers used the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument, and brief syntheses were used to evaluate and compare the different recommendations, considering only the most recent version. Evidence synthesis From the 1219 papers screened, ten eligible guidelines were identified from seven different regions/countries. Four of the included guidelines focused on stroke management, the other six on stroke rehabilitation. Robotic rehabilitation is generally recommended to improve lower limb motor function, including gait and strength. Unfortunately, there is still no consensus about the timing, frequency, training session duration and the exact characteristics of subjects who could benefit from robotics. Conclusions Our systematic review shows that the introduction of robotic rehabilitation in standard treatment protocols seems to be the future of stroke rehabilitation. However, robot assisted gait training (RAGT) for stroke needs to be improved with new solutions and in clinical practice guidelines, especially in terms of applicability.

Background: Postural abnormalities in Parkinson's disease (PD) form a spectrum of functional trunk misalignment, ranging from a “typical” parkinsonian stooped posture to progressively greater degrees of spine deviation. Objective: To analyze the association between degree of postural abnormalities and disability and to determine cut-off values of trunk bending associated with limitations in activities of daily living (ADLs), motor impairment, falls, and back pain. Methods: The study population was 283 PD patients with ≥5° of forward trunk bending (FTB), lateral trunk bending (LTB) or forward neck bending (FNB). The degrees were calculated using a wall goniometer (WG) and software-based measurements (SBM). Logistic regression models were used to identify the degree of bending associated with moderate/severe limitation in ADLs (Movement Disorders Society Unified PD Rating Scale [MDS-UPDRS] part II ≥17), moderate/severe motor impairment (MDS-UPDRS part III ≥33), history of falls (≥1), and moderate/severe back pain intensity (numeric rating scale ≥4). The optimal cut-off was identified using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Results: We found significant associations between modified Hoehn & Yahr stage, disease duration, sex, and limitation in ADLs, motor impairment, back pain intensity, and history of falls. Degree of trunk bending was associated only with motor impairment in LTB (odds ratio [OR] 1.12; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03–1.22). ROC curves showed that patients with LTB of 10.5° (SBM, AUC 0.626) may have moderate/severe motor impairment. Conclusions: The severity of trunk misalignment does not fully explain limitation in ADLs, motor impairment, falls, and back pain. Multiple factors possibly related to an aggressive PD phenotype may account for disability in PD patients with FTB, LTB, and FNB.

Introduction Software-based measurements of postural abnormalities in Parkinson's disease (PD) are the gold standard but may be time-consuming and not always feasible in clinical practice. Wall goniometer (WG) is an easier, quicker, and inexpensive instrument for screening patients with postural abnormalities, but no studies have investigated its validity so far. The aim of this study was to investigate the validity of the WG to measure postural abnormalities. Methods A total of 283 consecutive PD outpatients with ≥5° forward trunk, lateral trunk or forward neck bending (FTB, LTB, FNB, respectively) were recruited from seven centers for movement disorders. Postural abnormalities were measured in lateral and posterior view using a freeware program (gold standard) and the WG. Both angles were expressed in degrees (°). Sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of camptocormia, Pisa syndrome, and anterocollis were assessed. Results WG showed good to excellent agreement (intraclass correlation coefficient from 0.80 to 0.98) compared to the gold standard. Bland-Altman plots showed a mean difference between the methods from −7.4° to 0.4° with limits of agreements from −17.7° to 9.5°. Sensitivity was 100% for the diagnosis of Pisa syndrome, 95.74% for anterocollis, 76.67% for upper camptocormia, and 63.64% for lower camptocormia. Specificity was 59.57% for Pisa syndrome, 71.43% for anterocollis, 89.80% for upper camptocormia, and 100% for lower camptocormia. Overall, the WG underestimated measurements, especially in lower camptocormia with an average of −8.7° (90% of cases). Conclusion WG is a valid tool for screening Pisa syndrome and anterocollis, but approximately 10° more should be added for camptocormia.