Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39061422›Full record

ReviewBrain sciences2024

Feedback Interventions in Motor Recovery of Lateropulsion after Stroke: A Literature Review and Case Series.

Maria Gomez-Risquet, Anja Hochsprung, Eleonora Magni, Carlos Luque-Moreno

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Brain sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Maria Gomez-RisquetFacultad de Enfermería, Fisioterapia y Podología, Universidad de Sevilla, 41009 Seville, Spain.ORCID 0009-0005-7809-5147
Anja HochsprungUnidad de Neurología, Hospital Universitario Virgen Macarena, 41009 Seville, Spain.
Eleonora MagniFacultad de Enfermería, Fisioterapia y Podología, Universidad de Sevilla, 41009 Seville, Spain.
Carlos Luque-MorenoInstituto de Biomedicina de Sevilla (IBiS), Departamento de Fisioterapia, Universidad de Sevilla, 41009 Seville, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-5209-3382

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Lateropulsion is a post-stroke phenomenon marked by an active push of the body across the midline towards the more affected side and/or a resistance of the weight shift towards the less affected side. Within the mechanisms of treatment, feedback systems have been shown to be effective. The aim of the present study was to create a body of knowledge by performing a literature review on the use of feedback mechanisms in the treatment of lateropulsion and to report two cases of lateropulsion patients who had undergone feedback-based treatment.

methodsThe review was performed across five different databases (Embase, Medline/PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and PEDro) up to February 2024, and haptic feedback intervention was incorporated into the case series (with lateropulsion and ambulation capacity as the main variables).

resultsIn total, 211 records were identified and 6 studies were included after the review of the literature. The most used feedback modality was visual feedback. In the case series, positive results were observed from the intervention, particularly in the recovery of lateropulsion and balance, as well as in the improvement of gait for one patient. Patients demonstrated good adherence to the intervention protocol without adverse effects.

conclusionsVisual feedback is the most commonly used feedback modality in lateropulsion patients but other mechanisms such as haptic feedback also are feasible and should be taken into account. Larger sample sizes, extended follow-up periods, and the isolation of feedback mechanisms must be established to clarify evidence.

Indexed as

contraversive pushingfeedbackgait disordershaptic technologylateropulsionneurologicpostural balancepusher behaviorpusher syndromestroke rehabilitation

Identifiers

PMID39061422
PMCPMC11275014

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.