Evidence Hub

Robot-assisted therapy for upper extremity motor impairment after stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Jing-Yi Wu, Hao Cheng, Jiaqi Zhang, Shanli Yang, Su-Fang Cai

Physical Therapy, 2021

1,916 participants · 96 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to review the effects of robot-assisted therapy (RT) for improving poststroke upper extremity motor impairment.

METHODS

The PubMed, EMBASE, Medline, and Web of Science databases were searched from inception to April 8, 2020. Randomized controlled trials that were conducted to evaluate the effects of RT on upper extremity motor impairment poststroke and that used Fugl-Meyer Assessment Upper Extremity (FMA-UE) scores as an outcome were included. Two authors independently screened articles, extracted data, and assessed the methodological quality of the included studies using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed to pool the effect sizes across the studies.

RESULTS

Forty-one randomized controlled trials with 1916 stroke patients were included. Compared with dose-matched conventional rehabilitation, RT significantly improved the FMA-UE scores of the patients with stroke, with a small effect size (Hedges g = 0.25; 95% CI = 0.11 to 0.38; I2 = 45.9%). The subgroup analysis revealed that the effects of unilateral RT, but not that of bilateral RT, was superior to conventional rehabilitation (Hedges g = 0.32; 95% CI = 0.15 to 0.50; I2 = 55.9%). Regarding the type of robot devices, the effects of the end effector device (Hedges g = 0.22; 95% CI = 0.09 to -0.36; I2 = 35.4%), but not the exoskeleton device, were superior to conventional rehabilitation. Regarding the stroke stage, the…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 1,916 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free