Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Oct 28;13(1):270.
doi: 10.1186/s13643-024-02676-0.

Effects of physical therapy modalities for motor function, functional recovery, and post-stroke complications in patients with severe stroke: a systematic review update

Affiliations

Effects of physical therapy modalities for motor function, functional recovery, and post-stroke complications in patients with severe stroke: a systematic review update

Katrin Roesner et al. Syst Rev. .

Abstract

Background: Physical therapy interventions play a crucial role in the daily care of patients recovering from severe stroke. However, the efficacy of these interventions and associated modalities, including duration, intensity, and frequency, have not been fully elucidated. In 2020, a systematic review reported the beneficial effects of physical therapy for patients with severe stroke but did not assess therapeutic modalities. We aim to update the current evidence on the effects of physical therapy interventions and their modalities in relation to the recovery phase in people with severe stroke in a hospital or inpatient rehabilitation facility.

Methods: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and three other relevant databases between December 2018 and March 2021 and updated the search between April 2021 and March 2023.

Clinicaltrials: gov and ICTRP for searching trial registries helped to identify ongoing RCTs since 2023. We included individual and cluster randomized controlled trials in the English and German languages that compared physical therapy interventions to similar or other interventions, usual care, or no intervention in a hospital or rehabilitation inpatient setting. We screened the studies from this recent review for eligibility criteria, especially according to the setting. Critical appraisal was performed according to the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool 2.0. The data were synthesized narratively.

Results: The update identified 15 new studies, cumulating in a total of 30 studies (n = 2545 participants) meeting the eligibility criteria. These studies reported 54 outcomes and 20 physical therapy interventions. Two studies included participants during the hyperacute phase, 4 during the acute phase,18 during the early subacute phase, and 3 in the late subacute phase. Three studies started in the chronic phase. Summarised evidence has revealed an uncertain effect of physical therapy on patient outcomes (with moderate to low-quality evidence). Most studies showed a high risk of bias and did not reach the optimal sample size. Little was stated about the standard care and their therapy modalities.

Discussion: There is conflicting evidence for the effectiveness of physical therapy interventions in patients with severe stroke. There is a need for additional high-quality studies that also systematically report therapeutic modalities from a multidimensional perspective in motor stroke recovery. Due to the high risk of bias and the generally small sample size of the included studies, the generalizability of the findings to large and heterogeneous volumes of outcome data is limited.

Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42021244285.

Keywords: Dose; Effects; Physical therapy; Severe stroke; Systematic review update.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis 2020 study selection flow diagram
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Risk of bias of individual domains for the updated studies. Randomisation process Deviations from the intended interventions Missing outcome data Measurement of the outcome Selection of the reported result

References

    1. Krishnamurthi RV, Ikeda T, Feigin VL. Global, regional and country-specific burden of ischaemic stroke, intracerebral haemorrhage and subarachnoid haemorrhage: a systematic analysis of the global burden of disease study 2017. Neuroepidemiology. 2020;54(Suppl. 2):171–9. - PubMed
    1. Feigin VL, Nichols E, Alam T, Bannick MS, Beghi E, Blake N, et al. Global, regional, and national burden of neurological disorders, 1990–2016: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016. The Lancet Neurology. 2019May;18(5):459–80. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Feigin VL, Stark BA, Johnson CO, Roth GA, Bisignano C, Abady GG, et al. Global, regional, and national burden of stroke and its risk factors, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. The Lancet Neurology. 2021Oct;20(10):795–820. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Grefkes C, Fink GR. Recovery from stroke: current concepts and future perspectives. Neurol Res Pract. 2020Dec;2(1):17. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bernhardt J, Hayward KS, Kwakkel G, Ward NS, Wolf SL, Borschmann K, et al. Agreed definitions and a shared vision for new standards in stroke recovery research: The Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Roundtable taskforce. Int J Stroke. 2017Jul;12(5):444–50. - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources