Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorYakhoub, Yakhoub Hassan
dc.contributor.authorAhmed, Ishtiaq
dc.contributor.authorMUSTAFAOĞLU, RÜSTEM
dc.contributor.authorBenkhalifa, Nesrine
dc.date.accessioned2022-02-18T09:14:19Z
dc.date.available2022-02-18T09:14:19Z
dc.identifier.citationAhmed I., MUSTAFAOĞLU R., Benkhalifa N., Yakhoub Y. H. , "Does noninvasive brain stimulation combined with other therapies improve upper extremity motor impairment, functional performance, and participation in activities of daily living after stroke? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trial", TOPICS IN STROKE REHABILITATION, 2022
dc.identifier.issn1074-9357
dc.identifier.otherav_27e4c394-ac10-4bf6-a48e-cc5f13599048
dc.identifier.othervv_1032021
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12627/176804
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1080/10749357.2022.2026278
dc.description.abstractBackground Several studies have investigated the effect of noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) on upper limb motor function in stroke, but the evidence so far is conflicting. Objective We aimed to determine the effect of NIBS on upper limb motor impairment, functional performance, and participation in activities of daily living after stroke. Method Literature search was conducted for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effect of "tDCS" or "rTMS" combined with other therapies on upper extremity motor recovery after stroke. The outcome measures were Fugl-Meyer Assessment of Upper Extremity (FMA-UE), Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT), and Barthel Index (BI). The mean difference (MD) and 95%CI were estimated for motor outcomes. Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to assess the quality of evidence. Result Twenty-five RCTs involving 1102 participants were included in the review. Compared to sham stimulation, NIBS combined with other therapies has effectively improved FMA-UE (MD0.97 [95%CI, 0.09 to 1.86; p = .03]) and BI score (MD9.11 [95%CI, 2.27 to 15.95; p = .009]) in acute/sub-acute stroke (MD1.73 [95%CI, 0.61 to 2.85; p = .003]) but unable to modify FMA-UE score in chronic stroke (MD-0.31 [95%CI, -1.77 to 1.15; p = .68]). Only inhibitory (MD3.04 [95%CI, 1.76 to 4.31; I-2 = 82%, p = 20 sessions was found to be effective in improving FMA-UE score (Stimulation time: ES0.45; p <= .001; Sessions: ES0.33; p <= .001). The NIBS did not produce any significant improvement in WMFT as compared to sham NIBS (MD0.91 [95% CI, -0.89 to 2.70; p = .32]). Conclusion Moderate to high-quality evidence suggested that NIBS combined with other therapies is effective in improving upper extremity motor impairment and participation in activities of daily living after acute/sub-acute stroke.
dc.language.isoeng
dc.subjectKlinik Tıp
dc.subjectHealth Sciences
dc.subjectREHABİLİTASYON
dc.subjectDahili Tıp Bilimleri
dc.subjectSağlık Bilimleri
dc.subjectTıp
dc.subjectKlinik Tıp (MED)
dc.subjectPhysical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation
dc.subjectRehabilitation
dc.subjectChiropractics
dc.subjectFiziksel Tıp ve Rehabilitasyon
dc.titleDoes noninvasive brain stimulation combined with other therapies improve upper extremity motor impairment, functional performance, and participation in activities of daily living after stroke? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trial
dc.typeMakale
dc.relation.journalTOPICS IN STROKE REHABILITATION
dc.contributor.departmentInst Grad Studies , ,
dc.contributor.firstauthorID3390429


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record