Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34247295›Full record

Trial reportNeurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology2022

Evaluation of an upper limb robotic rehabilitation program on motor functions, quality of life, cognition, and emotional status in patients with stroke: a randomized controlled study.

Sahel Taravati, Kazim Capaci, Hale Uzumcugil, Goksel Tanigor

Erratum issued Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT04393480 (Comparison of Upper Extremity Robotic Rehabilitation Efficiency With Conventional Rehabilitation in Patients With Hemiplegia After Cerebrovascular Event), which is not on this map. Cited by 26 papers, 12 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 12 pooled it
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT04393480 nacompletednot on this map

Comparison of Upper Extremity Robotic Rehabilitation Efficiency With Conventional Rehabilitation in Patients With Hemiplegia After Cerebrovascular Event

TypeinterventionalSponsorSahel Taravati, M.D.Ran2016 to 2019Enrolled37ConditionsHemiplegia and/or Hemiparesis Following StrokeArmsRobotic therapy, Conventional therapy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 12 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 52 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Is the robotic rehabilitation that is added to intensive body rehabilitation effective for maximization of upper extremity motor recovery following a stroke? A randomized controlled study.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2023
    Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sahel TaravatiDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Ege University Faculty of Medicine, Bornova, İzmir, Turkey.
Kazim CapaciDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Ege University Faculty of Medicine, Bornova, İzmir, Turkey.
Hale UzumcugilDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Ege University Faculty of Medicine, Bornova, İzmir, Turkey.
Goksel TanigorDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Ege University Faculty of Medicine, Bornova, İzmir, Turkey. gtanigor@windowslive.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6456-7012
Ege University · TR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis study aims to find out whether including robotic therapy in addition to a conventional rehabilitation program affects the quality of life, motor function, cognition, and emotional status of hemiplegic patients.

designThirty-seven stroke patients recruited between April 2016 and April 2019 were included in the study. The patients were randomized into 2 groups (Robotic rehabilitation group-RR n:17, Control group n:20), RR was arranged to be 30-45 min, 5 days per week for 4 weeks. All patients were assessed at the beginning of therapy and the end of 4th week with Brunnstrom stages of motor recovery, Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA), handgrip strength, Purdue peg test, Minnesota manual dexterity test, Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS), Functional Independence Measure (FIM), Stroke Specific Quality of Life Scale (SS-QOL), Nottingham Extended Activities of Daily Living (NEADL) Scale, Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES- D).

resultsImprovements in motor function scores, spasticity, general functioning, activities of daily living, cognitive assessment were better in the robotic group when compared to the control group but this difference was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). Improvement in the CES-D in the RR-group was better in comparison to the control group (p = 0.018).

conclusionImprovements in motor functions were observed after the treatment in both groups. Although RR group improved better in numbers, none of the outcomes except the CES-D scale were significant. Robotic rehabilitation provides a favorable alternative bringing slight benefits, and also is advantageous in terms of work power and psychological recovery, making its addition to conventional neurological rehabilitation effective and useful in patient management after stroke.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04393480.

Indexed as

Robotic Surgical ProceduresStrokeStroke RehabilitationActivities of Daily LivingCognitionHand StrengthHumansQuality of LifeRecovery of FunctionTreatment OutcomeUpper ExtremityCognitionDepressionRehabilitationRobotic therapyStrokeUpper extremity

Identifiers

PMID34247295
OpenAlexW3182779780

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.