ArticlePDF Available

Abstract and Figures

To compare 2 rehabilitation strategies to improve balance after stroke: (1) a multisensorial approach based on higher intensity of balance tasks and exercise during visual deprivation and (2) a conventional neurodevelopmentaltheory-based treatment (NDT) that used a general approach for sensorimotor rehabilitation. This prospective, multicenter, randomized, parallel-group study measured outcomes with blinded assessors. Sixty-eight patients able to walk without human assistance were entered from 3 to 15 months (mean, 7 months) after a first hemispheric stroke. They received 20 sessions in 4 weeks of NDT or multisensorial rehabilitation. On day 0, day 30, and day 90, assessment included the Berg Balance Scale (BBS), posturography, gait (velocity, double stance phase, climbing 10 steps, amount of walking per day), the Functional Independence Measure, and the Nottingham Health Profile. All subjects improved significantly in balance and walking parameters. Regarding the main dependent variable (BBS on day 30), no difference between groups was found. Analysis of secondary outcomes suggested small differences in favor of the experimental group, but the differences are not likely to be clinically relevant. No evidence was found for the superiority of a multisensorial rehabilitation program in ambulatory patients with impairments beyond the time of inpatient therapy. Additional studies are recommended.
Content may be subject to copyright.
http://nnr.sagepub.com/
Repair
Neurorehabilitation and Neural
http://nnr.sagepub.com/content/22/5/468
The online version of this article can be found at:
DOI: 10.1177/1545968308315996
2008 22: 468Neurorehabil Neural Repair
Lebomin, Jean-Philippe Regnaux, Dominic Pérennou and Eric Vicaut
Alain P. Yelnik, Frederique Le Breton, Florence M. Colle, Isabelle V. Bonan, Caroline Hugeron, Véronique Egal, Elizabeth
Controlled Study
Rehabilitation of Balance After Stroke With Multisensorial Training: A Single-Blind Randomized
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
On behalf of:
American Society of Neurorehabilitation
can be found at:Neurorehabilitation and Neural RepairAdditional services and information for
http://nnr.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:
http://nnr.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:
http://nnr.sagepub.com/content/22/5/468.refs.htmlCitations:
What is This?
- Sep 9, 2008Version of Record >>
at Ecole Nationale de la Sante on December 4, 2013nnr.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Ecole Nationale de la Sante on December 4, 2013nnr.sagepub.comDownloaded from
468 Copyright © 2008 The American Society of Neurorehabilitation
Rehabilitation of Balance After Stroke With
Multisensorial Training: A Single-Blind
Randomized Controlled Study
Alain P. Yelnik, MD, Frederique Le Breton, MD, Florence M. Colle, MD,
Isabelle V. Bonan, MD, PhD, Caroline Hugeron, MD, Véronique Egal, Elizabeth Lebomin,
Jean-Philippe Regnaux, PhD, Dominic Pérennou, MD, PhD, Eric Vicaut, MD, PhD
Objective. To compare 2 rehabilitation strategies to improve
balance after stroke: (1) a multisensorial approach based on
higher intensity of balance tasks and exercise during visual
deprivation and (2) a conventional neurodevelopmental-
theory-based treatment (NDT) that used a general approach
for sensorimotor rehabilitation. Methods. This prospective,
multicenter, randomized, parallel-group study measured out-
comes with blinded assessors. Sixty-eight patients able to walk
without human assistance were entered from 3 to 15 months
(mean, 7 months) after a first hemispheric stroke. They
received 20 sessions in 4 weeks of NDT or multisensorial reha-
bilitation. On day 0, day 30, and day 90, assessment included
the Berg Balance Scale (BBS), posturography, gait (velocity,
double stance phase, climbing 10 steps, amount of walking per
day), the Functional Independence Measure, and the
Nottingham Health Profile. Results. All subjects improved sig-
nificantly in balance and walking parameters. Regarding the
main dependent variable (BBS on day 30), no difference
between groups was found. Analysis of secondary outcomes
suggested small differences in favor of the experimental group,
but the differences are not likely to be clinically relevant.
Conclusion. No evidence was found for the superiority of a
multisensorial rehabilitation program in ambulatory patients
with impairments beyond the time of inpatient therapy.
Additional studies are recommended.
Key Words: Stroke—Balance—Rehabilitation—Functional
independence—Sensory plasticity.
Balance disorders after stroke are a major problem.
The risk of fall for hemiparetic patients is dramat-
ically higher than for the general population dur-
ing acute poststroke hospitalization,1during the
rehabilitation period,2,3 and later during community liv-
ing.4There are specific risk factors for falls after stroke,
mainly mental disorders, urinary incontinence, motor
impairment, visuospatial neglect, and postural stability.1,5
For older women living at home 1 year after stroke, the
strongest risk factor for falls is a balance problem while
dressing rather than the usual risk factors reported in the
general population.6Complications of falls include frac-
tures, but one of the most important complication is the
fear of falling and the consequent restriction of activity.
This leads to limitation of autonomy, dependence on
caregivers, mood disorders, and deterioration of quality
of life. Initial balance disability is also a strong predictor
of function and recovery after stroke.7Thus, one of the
main objectives for physical rehabilitation after stroke
should be the restoration of balance control, allowing the
patient to walk and conduct daily activity in safety.
The mechanisms of balance disorders after stroke often
interact and include the site and volume of the stroke, pare-
sis, sensory loss, change in muscle tone, ataxia, and spatial
neglect. More subtle impairments include misperception of
visual8,9 or postural verticality10 and an excessive reliance on
visual cues.11 A conservative, highly protective approach to
physical therapy for patients with balance disorders may
not provide the range of therapeutic challenges necessary to
develop the strong balance reactions needed for active liv-
ing. Rather than being excessively focused on the quality of
the movement during walking, such as control of the knee,
physical rehabilitation for balance recovery may aim to pro-
mote more intensive sensory stimulation to help drive
mechanisms involved in brain plasticity for the acquisition
of skills. In a previous study, we observed that excessive
From Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Department, G.H.
Lariboisière—F. Widal,Université Paris 7, Paris (APY, FLB, FMC, IVB,
VE); Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Department, Hôpital
Raymond Poincaré, Université Versailles, Garches (CH, EL, JPR);
Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Department, CHU, Dijon (DP);
Unité de Recherche Clinique, G.H. Lariboisière—F.Widal, Université
Paris 7, Paris (EV), France.
Details of the study group “Balance After Stroke PHRC 2001—AOM
01 102” are given in Appendix A.
This study was supported by grants provided by the Health Ministry
Program for Clinical Research PHRC no. AOM 01 102. The authors
have no conflicts of interest to report.
Address correspondence to Alain P. Yelnik, MD, Physical Medicine and
Rehabilitation Department, G.H. Lariboisière—F.Widal, AP-HP,
Université Paris 7, 200 rue du faubourg Saint Denis, 75010 Paris,
France. E-mail: alain.yelnik@lrb.aphp.fr.
Yelnik AP, Le Breton F, Colle FM, et al. Rehabilitation of balance after
stroke with multisensorial training: a single-blind randomized con-
trolled study. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2008;22:468-476.
DOI: 10.1177/1545968308315996
at Ecole Nationale de la Sante on December 4, 2013nnr.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Rehabilitation of Balance After Stroke
Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair 22(5); 2008 469
reliance on visual cues by chronic hemiplegic patients was
lessened by a specific training program of visual depriva-
tion, with improvement of functional parameters such as
walking and climbing steps.12
This study compared 2 physical rehabilitation approaches
to restore balance after recent stroke. The first, a conven-
tional approach called neurodevelopmental training (NDT),
guides the quality of movement. The second, termed mul-
tisensorial, is based on 2 principles: the quantity of equilib-
rium tasks without emphasis on the quality of movement
and exercises performed during visual deprivation. To our
knowledge, this is the first comparison study that uses ran-
domization and single-blind evaluations.
METHODS
Subjects
Subjects who had hemiplegia after a single hemi-
spheric stroke due to an infarct or hemorrhage shown
by computerized tomography or magnetic resonance
imaging within 3 to 15 months prior to entry were
included. At onset of stroke,subjects had to be unable to
walk for at least 2 weeks, but not exceeding 3 months.
Walking was defined as the ability to walk at least 50
meters with an orthosis or cane if needed but without
human assistance. Patients had to be less than 80 years
old, ambulatory, and living at home. The physical reha-
bilitation was conducted in 1 of 2 rehabilitation centers
(Fernand Widal and Raymond Poincaré).
Exclusion criteria included a previous history of
walking disorder, cognitive disorders that prevented
comprehension of the rehabilitation program, and
history of a vestibular disorder.
Patients had to be able to give their written informed
consent. This study was approved by the ethics commit-
tee of Saint Louis Hospital (Paris, France).
Procedures
The following data was collected: age; gender; type of
stroke, ischemic or hemorrhagic; side and site of stroke;
time between stroke and inclusion; previous medical
history; loss of the visual field confirmed by Goldman
perimetry; existence of visuospatial neglect according to
the bells test13 and the bisection of a 20-cm-long line,
neglect being defined by an omission of at least 7 bells
and an error more than 6 mm of the line bisection;
motor function assessed by the Motricity Index14;and
proprioception assessed as normal (2), diminished (1),
or absent (0) for the perception of ankle movements.
The experimental design was a prospective, multicen-
ter, randomized parallel-group trial with a single-blind
evaluation. During a preliminary visit, each patient was
examined by the main investigator in the center to
decide if the inclusion criteria were fulfilled and to pro-
vide the information package. All subjects had a clinical
otologic examination. After patients gave informed con-
sent, the trial statistician generated the randomization
sequence using random number tables. Randomization
was stratified by center. Then the first visit for evalua-
tion (day 0 [D0]) was conducted by one of the blinded
evaluators. Physical therapy had to begin within 7 days,
and the 20 successive sessions had to be conducted 5
days a week for the following 4 weeks. Posttreatment
evaluation (day 30 [D30]) was carried out within 7 days
of the end of the physical rehabilitation program. The
second posttreatment evaluation (day 90 [D90]) was
carried out 3 months after the first evaluation. All the
data were collected in each center. The first patient was
included in July 2002, the last in March 2005, and the
last evaluation was done in June 2005.
Physical Rehabilitation
Programs (see Appendix B)
Group 1 (NDT-based treatment). Global sensorimotor
rehabilitation, based on the neurodevelopmental approach
described by Bobath,15 targeting more on the control of
weight bearing and shifting in erect stance and the qual-
ity of gait with less emphasis on the response to desta-
bilization situations.
Group 2 (multisensorial). Physical rehabilitation based
on the manipulation of the sensory information
required to maintain balance, attention being paid to
the amount of exercise, that is, duration and intensity,
rather than the quality of the movement. Most of the
exercises were conducted in visual deprivation, thus
challenging the selection and synthesis by the brain of
vestibular and somatosensory information.
Evaluation.Standing balance was assessed by means of
the Berg Balance Scale (BBS), a specific tool developed
to measure the functional standing balance of geriatric
individuals, validated in subjects with acute stroke16 and
with a force platform (Satel, Blagnac, France) recording
the limits of stability. Following a procedure previously
described,17 subjects were required to lean forward,
backward, and then to the right and left, without step-
ping or moving their feet from the standard foot posi-
tion. Data analyzed were the means over 2 trials of the
sum of the center of pressure (CoP) displacement in
millimeters on each sagittal and frontal axis. Dynamic
balance was assessed during walking by the percentage
of double-limb stance time, which reflects balance
at Ecole Nationale de la Sante on December 4, 2013nnr.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Yelnik et al
470 Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair 22(5); 2008
during walking,18 and the speed used to walk 10 m com-
fortably. The equipment used to analyze the gait pattern
was the locometer used by Bessou et al.19 Walking was
also assessed by the time taken to climb 10 steps and
return, by self-report of the time spent daily in out-of-
house walking, by the subjective perception of security
during walking assessed on a 10-point verbal scale (10
being high safety), and by the number of falls since the
stroke. Daily independence was assessed by the Functional
Independence Measurement (FIM).20 Quality of life was
assessed by the Nottingham Health Profile.21
The primary outcome measure and dependant vari-
able was the BBS on D30. Secondary outcomes included
the BBS on D90 and the other data on D30 and D90.
Statistical Methods
Because it was anticipated that the statistical distribu-
tion would not be Gaussian, the sample size calculation
was made using the method proposed by Noether.22 A
sample size of 36 in each group would have 80% power to
detect a probability of .7 that an observation in group 1 is
less than an observation in group 2 using a Wilcoxon
(Mann–Whitney) rank-sum test with a .05 two-sided sig-
nificance level. The main analysis was made on the intent-
to-treat population. In cases with a missing value, the last
observation value was carried forward. For 4 secondary
dependant variables, we had 1 or 2 missing values due to
a computer failure. In this case, we did not replace the
data, and because the analysis of covariance used the base-
line value for the covariate, we made the analysis of these
variables on the 67 or 66 patients available. A sensitivity
analysis for the main criteria was made using all the
patients who followed the protocol without major devia-
tions. As a result of the non-Gaussian statistical distribu-
tion, nonparametric analysis of covariance was used for all
variables except velocity and functional independence, for
which the statistical distribution allowed the use of a para-
metric covariance analysis. In all the cases, baseline values
of the variables were the covariates. In addition, time-
dependent changes were tested by the Wilcoxon test for
matched pairs. All calculations were made using SAS 9.13
(SAS Institute, Cary, NC). Because each criterion was
tested at 2 time points, α-risk was adjusted by Bonferonni’s
method, and a result was considered as significant if the
2-sided Pvalue was lower than .025.
RESULTS
Subjects’ Characteristics
The number of potential subjects screened was not
recorded, but no eligible patient refused to participate.
Sixty-seven of the 68 enrolled patients completed the
study but the analysis, conducted for intention to treat,
included all of the patients: 35 in the NDT group and 33
in the multisensorial group. As shown in Table 1, no dif-
ferences were found at entry between groups: mean age
was 55 years, mean time after stroke was 7 months (218
days), and most of the strokes were ischemic. Motor
impairment was substantial, but autonomy was high by
the mean FIM score. Fifty-one patients used a walking
aid (simple cane 15 and 18, crutch cane 5 and 4, tripod
cane 5 and 4). Table 2 summarizes the status of the 2
groups for the parameters assessed on D0. The mean
number of falls since stroke was 3.4 and 2.0 at the day of
inclusion, ranging from 0 to 15. There was no difference
between groups, except for daily time of walking, which
was slightly higher in the NDT-based group.
Major Deviations From the Protocol
In the NDT-based group, 1 patient had to stop after
5 sessions of physical therapy for carotid surgery, which
had not been planned. He could not be assessed. In the
multisensorial group, 1 patient was lost to follow-up
between D30 and D90 and another because of an
adverse event unrelated to the treatment. Two patients
had fewer than 16 physical therapy sessions (12 and 15),
but they could be assessed at D30 and D90. For 6
patients, the time lag for the first assessment was longer
than 45 days (46, 47, 2 ×48, and 2 ×49 days). All sub-
jects were included in the analysis, except for the sensi-
tivity analysis. In one center, initially expected to be a
third center, no data were available for the first 4
patients and the investigator had left the facility. We
stopped the study in this center. Thus, the analysis was
made on 68 instead of the 72 expected.
Assessment on Day 30 and
Day 90 in Each Group
A significant improvement was observed in each
group for most of the criteria, except for the limits of
stability on force platform, which remained unchanged
for both groups. Intragroup comparisons are given in
Tables 3 and 4.
Differences Between Groups on Day 30
(Table 3 and Figures 1-4)
No difference between groups was found for the
primary dependant variable (BBS). Regarding sec-
ondary criteria, a significant difference between groups,
at Ecole Nationale de la Sante on December 4, 2013nnr.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Rehabilitation of Balance After Stroke
Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair 22(5); 2008 471
in favor of the experimental group, was only found for
functional independence (P=.01).
Differences Between Groups
on Day 90 (Table 4 and Figures 1-4)
The difference between groups for functional inde-
pendence (P=.006) was strengthened. A difference in
favor of the experimental group appeared for the double
stance phase during walking (P=.02) and for quality of
life (P=.004). In a post hoc analysis, the correlation
between FIM, Nottingham, and double stance phase was
tested. FIM was significantly correlated with the double
stance phase at D30 (P=.0003) and at D90 (P=.0001).
There was no correlation between quality of life and the
double stance phase. The other outcome measures did
not show any significant improvement.
Finally, in both groups a significant improvement of
most of the parameters was observed. As there was no
difference between groups for the primary dependant
variable, the superiority of the multisensorial approach
was not in evidence. There was a statistical trend in
favor of the multisensorial approach as evidenced on
D90 by a lower percentage of double stance time during
walking, higher functional independence, and better
quality of life, but the clinical meaning to patients of
small values for improvement is questionable.
Table 1. General Characteristics of the Groupsa
NDT-Based Treatment (n =35) Multisensorial (n =33)
Gender male 62.9 (22) 66.7 (22)
Age mean ±SD, (range) 54.9 ±11.8 (26.5-77.3) 55.5 ±11.6 (32.5-78.3)
Side of the lesion, right/left 17/16 20/15
Ischemic stroke 68.6 (24) 75.8 (25)
Mean time after stroke (days) 218.4 ±93.4 217.2 ±92.9
Motricity index
Upper limb (max 100) 33.1 ±26 37.3 ±25.2
Lower limb (max 100) 57.2 ±19.2 57.1 ±17.2
Lower limb proprioception
Anesthesia 3.0 (1)
Hypoesthesia 62.9 (22) 42.4 (14)
Normal 37.1 (13) 54.6 (18)
Visual field defect 8.6 (3) 6.1 (2)
Visuospatial neglect 17 (6) 12.1 (4)
Abbreviations: NDT, neurodevelopmental theory; SD, standard deviation.
aData are given as mean ±SD or percentage and (number).
Table 2. Status for the 2 Groups on Day 0
Median (Q1; Q3) or Mean (95% CI)
NDT-Based Treatment (n =35) Multisensorial (n =33)
Berg Balance Scale 47 (39; 53) 49 (42; 53)
Speed of walking 0.63 (0.50; 0.76)a,b 0.61 (0.50; 0.72)b
Percentage of double-limb stance time 16.1 (10.7; 21.1)a15.2 (11.1; 24.7)
Time to climb 10 steps and return 33 (23; 55)a35 (26; 55)
Daily time of walking (minutes) 30 (0; 60) 20 (0; 30)
Security sensation during walking 7 (5; 8) 6 (5; 7)
Number of falls since stroke 2 (1; 4) 1 (0; 2)
Functional Independence Measure 109 (105.7; 112.2)b108.5 (105.6; 111.4)b
Quality of life 178.1 (81.4; 301.3) 157.7 (124.3; 269.4)
Posturographic limits of stability 176.8 (82.4; 282.8)c230.6 (103.9; 286.2)
Abbreviations: NDT, neurodevelopmental theory; CI, confidence interval.
aTwo data missing.
bMean (95% CI).
cOne datum missing.
at Ecole Nationale de la Sante on December 4, 2013nnr.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Yelnik et al
472 Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair 22(5); 2008
DISCUSSION
The aim of this controlled trial was to compare 2
kinds of physical rehabilitation approaches to restore
balance after stroke. On the basis of previous studies
showing an excessive dependence on vision in chronic
hemiplegic patients11 and the efficacy of a rehabilitation
program of visual deprivation,12 we made the hypothe-
sis that a multisensorial training approach, under visual
deprivation with somatosensorial and vestibular stimu-
lation earlier after stroke, could be more efficient than a
traditional one based on neurodevelopmental concepts.
The present study failed to reach the statistical sig-
nificance level for its main dependant variable (ie, the
BBS at D30). Several reasons could explain this result.
First, our choice of primary dependant variable was
perhaps inadequate. On designing this study we
expected a shorter time lag after stroke. The relatively
long period poststroke in our population resulted in
high scores for BBS on D0, which strongly limited the
chances of observing any significant difference between
groups because of a ceiling effect. The choice of the BBS
was probably not the best one, as it primarily assesses
balance in standing position with eyes open. Finally, the
Table 3. Status for the 2 groups on Day 30 With Statistical Significance of Between-Group Differences in the Last Column
(Comparison of Changes From Baseline by Nonparametric Covariance Analysis)
Median (Q1; Q3) or Lsmean (95% CI)
NDT-Based Treatment (N =35) Multisensorial (N =33)
Berg Balance Scale 53 (43;55)a53 (48;55)a.393
Speed of walking .72 (0.67; 0.77)a,b 0.76 (0.71; 0.98)a,b .275b
Percentage of double stance phase 14 (8; 21.7)c14.4 (10.0; 22.1)a.372
Time to climb 10 steps and return 30 (21; 40)a30 (21; 45)a.318
Daily time of walking (minutes) 30 (5; 60)a30 (15; 60)a.183
Security sensation during walking 7 (5; 9), NS 8 (6; 8)a.236
Number of falls since stroke 3 (1; 4) 1 (0; 3) .44
Functional Independence Measure 109.2 (108.1; 110.3), NSb111.2 (110.1; 112.4)a,b .01b
Quality of life 156.8 (46.9; 299.8), NS 109.5 (62.6; 159.0)d.04
Posturographic limits of stability 172.3 (80.5; 270.1), NS 239.0 (103.7; 291.5), NS .361
Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; NS, not significant.
aP<.001 (statistical significance of intragroup comparison [D30 vs D0]).
bParametric covariance analysis and least square mean (Lsmean), 95% CI.
cP<.025 (statistical significance of intragroup comparison [D30 vs D0]).
dP<.01 (statistical significance of intragroup comparison [D30 vs D0])
Table 4. Status for the 2 Groups on Day 90 With Statistical Significance of Between-Group Differences in the Last Column
(Comparison of Changes From Baseline by Nonparametric Covariance Analysis)
Median (Q1; Q3) or Lsmean (95% CI)
NDT-Based Treatment (N =35) Multisensorial (N =33)
Berg Balance Scale 51 (44; 55)a53 (49.0; 55.0)a.058
Speed of walking 0.73 (0.67; 0.79)a,b 0.79 (0.73; 0.84)a,b .200b
Percentage of double stance phase 15.2 (9; 18.2)c14.4 (9.4; 19.5)c.024
Time to climb 10 steps and return 32 (20; 49)a28 (23.0; 41.0)a.136
Daily time of walking (minutes) 30 (15; 60), NS 60 (30.0; 60.0)a.057
Security sensation during walking 7 (5; 9), NS 7 (5; 8), NS .983
Number of falls since stroke 3 (1; 5) 2 (1; 3) .778
Functional Independence Measure 109.6 (108.3; 111), NSb112.3 (111; 113.6)a,b .006b
Quality of life 138.9 (63.8; 297.1), NS 99.8 (61.5; 163.4)d.004
Posturographic limits of stability 179.8 (84.4; 279.6), NS 228.3 (90.8; 295.6), NS .765
Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; NS, not significant.
aP<.001 (statistical significance of intragroup comparison [D90 vs D0]).
bParametric covariance analysis and least square mean (Lsmean), 95% CI.
cP<.025 (statistical significance of intragroup comparison [D90 vs D0]).
dP<.01 (statistical significance of intragroup comparison [D90 vs D0]).
at Ecole Nationale de la Sante on December 4, 2013nnr.sagepub.comDownloaded from
choice of D30 might not correspond to a sufficiently
long period for training and evaluation, as suggested by
the increase in difference with time between the 2
groups for most of the parameters. The second possible
reason for not achieving statistical significance on the
BBS scores at D30 was that the potential for improve-
ment in these patients was still high, as we observed a
significant improvement in both groups for most of the
outcome measures. This proves that soon but not early
after stroke, that is, at a mean of 7 months, the potential
of balance and functional improvement with rehabilita-
tion is still high, irrespective of the techniques
employed. Third, the sample size of the study was prob-
ably too small, reflecting too much optimism in the
expected results of the method tested. The high number
of physical therapists participating in the study could
also have influenced the results. The choice of more
than 1 physical therapist per center was made to allow
for immediate change in case of an unexpected event or
departure. To guarantee standardized treatment, the
guide for protocol, as described in Appendix B, was
explained in sufficient detail and was accompanied by a
patient file in which the physical therapist daily noted
the exact progression of the exercises.
As improvement was observed in the 2 groups for
most of the parameters, the absence of improvement in
the limits of stability recorded on the force platform
Rehabilitation of Balance After Stroke
Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair 22(5); 2008 473
Figure 1. Medians and lower and upper quartiles for Berg
Balance Scale at the different times of the study. Lines repre-
sent 1.5 interquartile distance. Gray represents the multisen-
sorial group.
Figure 2. Medians and lower and upper quartiles for the
double stance phase at the different times of the study. Lines
represent 1.5 interquartile distance. Gray represents the multi-
sensorial group.
Figure 3. Medians and lower and upper quartiles for quality
of life (the best the lower) at the different times of the study.
Lines represent 1.5 interquartile distance. Gray represents the
multisensorial group.
Figure 4. Means and standard error for Functional Independence
Measure at the different times of the study.
at Ecole Nationale de la Sante on December 4, 2013nnr.sagepub.comDownloaded from
seems surprising. Two explanations are reasonable.
First, the task was difficult to understand without train-
ing. Second, many patients performed it using a hip
strategy, leaning the head forward but the pelvis back-
ward, so no measurable increase of CoP displacement
occurred. Therefore, our opinion is that this task is not
suitable for hemiplegic patients and cannot be recom-
mended to assess balance after stroke.
Despite the lack of difference between groups for the
primary dependant variable, the results presented here
allow us to suggest that our working hypothesis is at
least partly right. A trend in favor of the multisensorial
program appeared for functional independence, quality
of life, and a decrease in double limb stance support
during walking. The benefit of functional independence
with the multisensorial program may be related to an
improvement of dynamic balance, because a decrease of
the percentage of double stance phases during walking
appeared over the 3-month period of evaluation. This
latter criterion is good evidence for balance during gait,
and the post hoc analysis showed a significant correla-
tion between FIM and double-limb support at D30 and
at D90. Although the activity during the D30 and D90
period was not monitored, the improvement for the
multisensorial group between D30 and D90 could
reflect a long-term benefit of this training aiming to
prevent the development of visual dependence.
Nevertheless, although statistically significant, the clini-
cal meaning of these differences between groups is lim-
ited as they were based on small values.
Visual dependence for balance is characterized by an
excessive confidence in visual input, even when erro-
neous, despite normal vestibular or sensory function,
and can be detected by balance recording on a dynamic
force platform such as Equitest (Neurocom, Clackamas,
OR).11,23 Such visual dependence has been described in
Parkinson’s disease24 and after peripheral or central
vestibular disorders,25,26 as well as in normal elderly sub-
jects, especially in fallers when compared with nonfall-
ers.27 Thus, it is a risk factor for falls. The detection of
individual comportments before beginning rehabilita-
tion and adapting rehabilitation to them could be
important.28 The usefulness of these exercises may differ
according to individual characteristics related to visual
dependence at baseline, which could not be fully
defined in the present study and deserves to be investi-
gated by further studies.
This new approach for balance rehabilitation after
stroke differs from others commonly practiced.Different
approaches have been tried to improve specifically 2 of
the main disturbances of balance after stroke, asymme-
try of body weight distribution and instability. Most of
them are based on visual biofeedback control of the CoP
displacements on a force platform.29-33 Despite some
interesting results,31,32,34 there is no strong evidence for
the functional usefulness of this force platform train-
ing.35,36 Other interesting different approaches have
been explored. The misperception of postural vertical-
ity, which probably explains some of the more dramatic
problems such as the pusher syndrome, could be an
important goal for rehabilitation.37
Further studies of a multisensorial therapy approach of
greater intensity and duration,38 perhaps combined with
other task-related mobility training, may be worth testing
in patients who have less functional mobility and start
sooner after onset of stroke than the group we studied.
Future studies should also consider using a dynamic mea-
sure such as changes in walking speed or double limb
stance and define the level of visual dependence.
APPENDIX A
The Study Group “Balance After Stroke
PHRC 2001—AOM 01 102”
Main investigator: Alain Yelnik
Design: Alain Yelnik, Dominic Pérennou
Physical therapy for rehabilitation: Fernand Widal
Center—Philippe Roth, Peggy Ruminski, Isabelle
Pousson, and Emmanuelle Normand; Raymond Poincaré
Center—Johanna Robertson, Julie Stil, Emmanuelle
Danzart, Pierre Lenaoures, Dominique Rouat
Blind evaluators: Frédérique Lebreton, Florence Colle,
Jean Philippe Regnaux
Monitoring: Denise Mockers for the Clinical Research
Unit
Statistical analysis: Eric Vicaut and Carole Boutron for
the Clinical Research Unit
Recruitment: Alain Yelnik, Frédérique Lebreton, Isabelle
Bonan (Fernand Widal Hospital), Caroline Hugeron and
Alexis Schnitzler (Raymond Poincaré Hospital,
Garches), Isabelle Crassard and Marie Germaine Bousser
(Neurological Department, Lariboisière Hospital),
Gérard Amarenco (PMR Department, Rothschild
Hospital), Pascale Pradat-Diehl (PMR Department,
Pitié-Salpétrière Hospital), Jean Pascal Devailly (PMR
Department, Avicenne Hospital)
ENT examinations: Michel Kossowski, Marc Raynal
(Military Hospital Percy, Clamart)
Organization: Véronique Egal, Elizabeth Lebomin
Inclusion and informed consent: Alain Yelnik, Caroline
Hugeron, Alexis Shnitzler
APHP head of project: Cécile Jourdain
APPENDIX B
Physical Rehabilitation Programs
Group 1 (NDT-Based Treatment)
Principles: Based on global sensory motor rehabilitation
derived from the neurodevelopmental concepts described by
Yelnik et al
474 Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair 22(5); 2008
at Ecole Nationale de la Sante on December 4, 2013nnr.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Bobath, more attention paid to the quality of the gesture and
gait control, the spasticity, and abnormal movement inhibi-
tion than to the quantity of exercise and an increase of the dif-
ficulty from one session to another depending on the ability of
the patients. Each session lasted 60 to 70 minutes, depending
on the rest required, and included 5 minutes for spasticity
inhibition, 40 to 45 minutes of exercises specific to the session,
10 to 20 minutes of rest distributed throughout the session,
and related to need.
Sessions 1 to 4: Exercises conducted on the Bobath plat-
form, weight shifting, waist dissociation, pelvis control, crawl-
ing, turning over, fourfooting, and standing on the knees.
Session 5 to 8: Exercises on the edge of the platform in sit-
ting position, transfers from lying to sitting, sitting to stand-
ing, sitting on the platform to a chair, upper limb used for
bearing. Analytic exercises for upper limb were associated for
a maximum of one third of the session.
Sessions 9 to 20: Walking in the corridor and on the steps,
control of the weight bearing and shifting, quality of the heel
strike, knee control, and waist dissociation.
During the 20 sessions, visual deprivation, head move-
ments, or training with unstable bases of support were forbid-
den for the progression of exercise difficulties.
Group 2 (Multisensorial)
Principles: Based on the maximum stimulation of the sensory
inputs needed for equilibrium, including an amount of exercise
with visual deprivation. Each type of exercise was related to the
patient’s progress, with progression under visual control for rep-
etition of the exercises, then as much under visual deprivation as
possible, and using unstable planes and foam ground-sheet, tilt-
ing the head back, rightward and leftward. The duration of the
exercises under visual deprivation was not exactly fixed and took
approximately half of the session.
Each session lasted 60 to 70 minutes, depending on the rest
required and included 5 minutes for spasticity inhibition, 30
to 35 minutes to specific modalities (see below), 10 minutes of
walking and stepping, and 10 to 20 minutes of rest distributed
throughout the session.
The exercises had to be repeated for patients to learn them
and moreover improve their performance in terms of dura-
tion or intensity by slowly increasing the difficulty.There were
4 types of modalities, conducted as follows: sessions 1 to 4,
modality 1; sessions 5 to 8, modality 2; sessions 9 to 20, by
alternating modality 3 once and modality 4 twice.
Modality 1: On the foam Bobath platform, fourfooting, stand-
ing on the knees, anteroposterior and lateral weight shifting,
moving objects with the upper limb, external destabilization.
Modality 2: Sitting on the edge of the platform and sitting
on a ball, weight shifting, upper limb movements, moving
objects with the upper limb, external destabilizations.
Modality 3: Static standing with feet together,tandem posi-
tion, one foot standing, control of weight shifting, moving
objects with upper limbs, external destabilizations.
Modality 4: Walking with movements of the upper limbs,
while speaking, with external destabilization, walking laterally
and backward, 10 minutes of treadmill training without upper
limb support, opening eyes at various speeds, closing eyes at
constant speed.
In each modality,the variations that can be used were head
movements, foam support, unstable platform, rolling skate,
irregular floor, and constant visual deprivation.
REFERENCES
1. Tutuarima JA, van der Meulen JH, de Haan RJ, van Straten A,
Limburg M. Risk factors for falls of hospitalized stroke patients.
Stroke. 1997;28:297-301.
2. Teasell R, MacRae M, Foley N, Bhardwaj A. The incidence and
consequences of falls in stroke patients during inpatient rehabil-
itation: factors associated with high risk. Arch Phys Med Rehabil.
2002;83:329-333.
3. Perennou D, El Fatimi A, Masmoudi M, et al. Incidence, circum-
stances and consequences of falls in patients undergoing rehabilita-
tion after a first stroke. Ann Readapt Med Phys. 2005;48: 138-145.
4. Forster A, Young J. Incidence and consequences of falls due to
stroke: a systematic inquiry. BMJ. 1995;311:83-85.
5. Nyberg L, Gustafson Y. Fall prediction index for patients in stroke
rehabilitation. Stroke. 1997;28:716-721.
6. Lamb SE, Ferrucci L, Volapto S, Fried LP, Guralnik JM. Risk fac-
tors for falling in home-dwelling older women with stroke: the
Women’s Health and Aging Study. Stroke. 2003;34:494-501.
7. Tyson SF, Hanley M, Chillala J, Selley A,Tallis R. The relationship
between balance, disability, and recovery after stroke: predictive
validity of the Brunel Balance Assessment. Neurorehabil Neural
Repair. 2007;21:341-346.
8. Bonan IV, Gellez-Leman MC, Legargasson JF, Guichard JP, Yelnik
AP. Evolution of subjective visual vertical perturbation after
stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2006;20:484-491.
9. Bonan IV, Hubeaux K, Gellez-Leman MC, Guichard JP, Vicaut E,
Yelnik AP. Influence of subjective visual vertical misperception
on balance recovery after stroke. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry.
2007;78:49-55.
10. Perennou DA, Amblard B, Leblond C, Pelissier J. Biased postural
vertical in humans with hemispheric cerebral lesions. Neurosci
Lett. 1998;252:75-78.
11. Bonan IV, Colle FM, Guichard JP, et al. Reliance on visual infor-
mation after stroke. Part I: balance on dynamic posturography.
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004;85:268-273.
12. Bonan IV, Yelnik AP, Colle FM, et al. Reliance on visual informa-
tion after stroke. Part II: effectiveness of a balance rehabilitation
program with visual cue deprivation after stroke: a randomized
controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004;85:274-278.
13. Gauthier L, Dehaut F, Joanette Y. The bells test: a quantitative and
qualitative test for visual neglect. Int J Clin Neuropsychol.
1989;11:49-53.
14. Collin C, Wade DT. Assessing motor impairment after stroke: a
pilot reliability study. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1990;53:
576-576.
15. Bobath B. Hémiplégie de l’adulte, bilans et traitement. Paris,
France: Masson; 1990.
16. Stevenson TJ, Garland SJ. Standing balance during internally
produced perturbations in subjects with hemiplegia: validation
of the balance scale. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1996;77:656-662.
17. Clark S, Rose DJ, Fujimoto K. Generalizability of the limits of
stability test in the evaluation of dynamic balance among older
adults. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1997;78:1078-1084.
18. Winter DA, Patla AE, Frank JS, Walt SE. Biomechanical walking
pattern changes in the fit and healthy elderly. Phys Ther.
1990;70:340-347.
Rehabilitation of Balance After Stroke
Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair 22(5); 2008 475
at Ecole Nationale de la Sante on December 4, 2013nnr.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Yelnik et al
476 Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair 22(5); 2008
19. Bessou P, Dupui P, Montoya R, Pagès B. Simultaneous recording
of longitudinal displacements of both feet during human walk-
ing. J Physiol. 1989;83:102-110.
20. Granger CV, Hamilton BB. The uniform data system for medical
rehabilitation report of first admissions for 1990. Am J Phys Med
Rehabil. 1992;71:33-38.
21. Bucquet D, Condon S, Ritchie K. The French version of the
Nottingham Health Profile. A comparison of weights with those
of the source version. Soc Sci Med. 1990;30:829-835.
22. Noether GE. Sample size determination for some common non-
parametric statistics. J Am Stat Assoc. 1987;82:645-647.
23. Nashner LM, Peters JF. Dynamic posturography in the diagnosis
and management of dizziness and balance disorders. Neurol Clin.
1990;8:331-349.
24. Azulay JP, Mesure S, Amblard B, Pouget J. Increased visual
dependence in Parkinson’s disease. Percept Mot Skills. 2002;95:
1106-1114.
25. Guerraz M, Yardley L, Bertholon P,et al.Visual vertigo: symptom
assessment, spatial orientation and postural control. Brain.
2001;124:1646-1656.
26. Suarez H, Muse P, Suarez A, Arocena M. Assessment of the risk of
fall, related to visual stimulation, in patients with central vestibu-
lar disorders. Acta Otolaryngol. 2001;121:220-224.
27. Lord SR, Webster IW. Visual field dependence in elderly fallers
and non-fallers. Int J Aging Hum Dev. 1990;31:267-277.
28. Yelnik AP, Kassouha A, Bonan IV, et al. Postural visual dependence
after recent stroke: assessment by optokinetic stimulation. Gait
Posture. 2006;24:262-269.
29. Winstein CJ, Gradner ER, McNeal DR, Barto PS, Nicholson DE.
Standing balance training: effect on balance and locomotion in
hemiparetic adults. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1989;70:755-762.
30. Lee MY, Wong M K, Tang FT. Clinical evaluation of a new
biofeedback standing balance training device. J Med Eng Technol.
1996;20:60-66.
31. Sackley CM, Lincoln NB. Single blind randomized controlled
trial of visual feedback after stroke: effects on stance symmetry
and function. Disabil Rehabil. 1997;12:536-546.
32. Kerdoncuff V, Duruffe A, Petrilli S, et al. Interest of visual
biofeedback training in rehabilitation of balance after stroke.
Ann Readapt Med Phys. 2004;47:169-176.
33. de Haart M, Geurts AC, Dault MC, Nienhuis B, Duysens J.
Restoration of weight-shifting capacity in patients with posta-
cute stroke: a rehabilitation cohort study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil.
2005;86:755-762.
34. Cheng PT,Wang CM, Chung CY, Chen CL.Effects of visual feed-
back rhythmic weight-shift training on hemiplegic stroke
patients. Clin Rehabil. 2004;18:747-753.
35. Barclay-Goddard R, Stevenson T, Poluha W, Moffatt MEK,
Taback SP. Force platform feedback for standing balance training
after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004;(4):CD004129.
36. Van Peppen RPS, Kortsmit M, Lindeman E, Kwakkel G. Effects of
visual feedback therapy on postural control in bilateral standing
after stroke: a systematic review. J Rehabil Med. 2006;38:3-9.
37. Baccini M, Paci M,Rinaldi L.The scale for contraversive pushing:
a reliability and validity study. Neurorehabil Neural Repair.
2006;20:468-472.
38. Dobkin B. Confounders in rehabilitation trials of task-oriented
training. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2007;21:3-13.
at Ecole Nationale de la Sante on December 4, 2013nnr.sagepub.comDownloaded from
... Assessing a training program of five 1-hour sessions per week during four consecutive weeks, Bonan and colleagues 20 compared the effects of balance training under no vision versus full vision in stroke survivors, with balance evaluation made through a protocol involving sensory constraint. Results showed that the vision-constraint group achieved higher balance gains than the full vision group (see 21 for contradictory results). Further research compared the effects of balance training for stroke survivors under visual constraint against manipulation of tactile/proprioceptive information from the feet soles and ankles by training over a malleable surface 22 . ...
Article
Full-text available
BACKGROUND: Balance deficits in stroke survivors can be attenuated through appropriate training procedures. AIM: In the current investigation, we aimed to compare gains in dynamic balance between a training protocol employing progressive visual and tactile/proprioceptive constraints against balance training under full sensory information in stroke survivors. METHOD: Participants were randomly assigned to one of two groups for 12 balance training sessions, three sessions per week. In the constraint group (n=9), training was divided into four blocks of three sessions: full sensory information, visual constraint, tactile/proprioceptive constraint, and the combination of the latter two conditions. In the full sensory information group (n=10), participants trained under full vision supported on a rigid surface. At the end of each training block, evaluations were made through the Berg Balance Scale (BBS) and Timed Up and Go (TUG) tests. Analysis was made through Friedman, Wilcoxon matched-pairs and Mann-Whitney U tests. RESULTS: Intra and intergroup analyses showed that training under sensory constraint led to higher performance gains than training under full sensory information both in the BBS postural (Δ = 21.20%, p = 0.02) and dynamic (Δ = 18.17%, p = 0.04) tasks. For TUG, analysis of proportional gains indicated significantly greater time reduction in the sensory constraint compared to the full group (Δ = 16.48%, p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Balance training under sensory constraint led to higher balance gains than training with availability of full sensory information.
... Algunas investigaciones han reportado que la técnica Bobath es más eficiente para la rehabilitación que otras técnicas de rehabilitación: en la reducción de la espasticidad es mejor que el tratamiento ortopédico 9 y en la velocidad de marcha es mejor que sólo practicar la tarea. 10 Por otro lado el método Kabat también ha mostrado resultados positivos. 11 Lo anterior concuerda con el caso presentado, donde se observa la disminución completa de la espasticidad muscular, la obtención de control postural, el reaprendizaje de los movimientos normales y el restablecimiento de sus movimientos normales. ...
Article
Introducción. Las técnicas de Bobath y Kabat son utilizadas con frecuencia en la rehabilitación neurológica por secuelas de un evento vascular cerebral (EVC). Sin embargo, la evidencia sobre su efectividad en el domicilio del paciente es escasa. Objetivo. Presentar un caso clínico sobre la rehabilitación neurológica en casa con las técnicas Bobath y Kabat de un paciente adulto con EVC postraumático. Caso clínico. Paciente de 38 años con diagnóstico previo de secuelas motoras de traumatismo craneoencefálico severo con evento vascular cerebral subaracnoideo derecho y hemiparesia espástica derecha secundario a un accidente automovilístico 8 meses antes de la entrevista médica. A la exploración física se observa leve estrabismo divergente de ojo derecho, hemiparesia e hiperreflexia (+) en extremidades derechas y espasticidad en las 4 extremidades tanto a la exploración pasiva como a la activa. Se le realizó terapia física con métodos Bobath y Kabat durante 5 meses. El paciente paso de tener requerir una asistencia mínima a una independencia completa. Conclusiones. El tratamiento de rehabilitación en casa con el método Bobath y Kabat, mejoró la independencia del paciente, sin embargo, es necesario realizar ensayos clínicos que permitan comparar la eficacia de estas técnicas con otras terapias de rehabilitación neurológica.
... Some scholars found that balance exercises can improve the motor coordination by remodeling nerve synapses and activating astrocytes to improve the patient's balance. However, early post-stroke multisensorial training, under visual deprivation with somatosensorial and vestibular stimulation, could be more effective than a traditional approach based on neurodevelopmental concepts [156,157]. ...
Article
Full-text available
Introduction: Vestibular rehabilitation (VR) is now a subject of active studies and has been shown to be effective for multiple vestibular disorders, peripheral or central. VR is a physical therapy that helps train the central nervous system to compensate for vestibular dysfunction. There is moderate to strong evidence that VR is safe and effective for the management of peripheral vestibular dysfunction. Nonetheless, the studies on how VR works on central vestibular dysfunction remains scanty. Areas covered: This article addressed the rehabilitation strategies and possible mechanisms, including how central vestibular function might improve upon rehabilitation. In addition, it provides some examples concerning the effect of VR on central vestibular dysfunction. Expert opinion: VR works on the vestibular system through repetition of specific physical exercises that activate central neuroplastic mechanisms to achieve adaptive compensation of the impaired functions. VR has become a mainstay in the management of patients with dizziness and balance dysfunction. Individualized VR programs are a safe and effective treatment option for a large percentage of patients with central vestibular disease reporting imbalance and dizziness. Exploration of various treatment strategies and possible mechanisms will help develop the best and personalized VR treatment for patients with central vestibular dysfunction.
Article
Purpose The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of neurodevelopmental treatment (NDT) in combination with lowfrequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (LFrTMS) on balance, gait, and cortical activity in chronic stroke patients. Methods In this study, 6 patients with chronic stroke were divided into 3 patients in the LFrTMS group combined with neurodevelopmental treatment (NDT) and 3 patients in the shamrTMS group combined with NDT. In this study, the MTDbalance system, AMTI, MEP amplitude, and MEP latency were evaluated before and after the intervention. Results First, there was a significant difference in weight bearing rate and foot pressure evaluation pre and post intervention in the study group (p<0.05) (p<0.01). Second, there was a significant difference in the study group as a result of the ground reaction force evaluation (p<0.05). Third, there was a statistically significant difference in the MEP latency of the study group as a result of cerebral cortical activity evaluation (p<0.05). Conclusion The result suggests that LFrTMS combined with NDT were found to be effective in improving balance and gait ability and cerebral cortical activity in chronic stroke patients.
Article
Full-text available
Background Various approaches to physical rehabilitation to improve function and mobility are used after stroke. There is considerable controversy around the relative effectiveness of approaches, and little known about optimal delivery and dose. Some physiotherapists base their treatments on a single approach; others use components from several different approaches. Objectives Primary objective: To determine whether physical rehabilitation is effective for recovery of function and mobility in people with stroke, and to assess if any one physical rehabilitation approach is more effective than any other approach. Secondary objective: To explore factors that may impact the effectiveness of physical rehabilitation approaches, including time after stroke, geographical location of study, intervention dose/duration, intervention provider, and treatment components. Stakeholder involvement: Key aims were to clarify the focus of the review, inform decisions about subgroup analyses, and co‐produce statements relating to key implications. Search methods For this update, we searched the Cochrane Stroke Trials Register (last searched November 2022), CENTRAL (2022, Issue 10), MEDLINE (1966 to November 2022), Embase (1980 to November 2022), AMED (1985 to November 2022), CINAHL (1982 to November 2022), and the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (to November 2022). Selection criteria Inclusion criteria: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of physical rehabilitation approaches aimed at promoting the recovery of function or mobility in adult participants with a clinical diagnosis of stroke. Exclusion criteria: RCTs of upper limb function or single treatment components. Primary outcomes: measures of independence in activities of daily living (IADL) and motor function. Secondary outcomes: balance, gait velocity, and length of stay. Data collection and analysis Two independent authors selected studies according to pre‐defined eligibility criteria, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias in the included studies. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence. Main results In this review update, we included 267 studies (21,838 participants). Studies were conducted in 36 countries, with half (133/267) in China. Generally, studies were heterogeneous, and often poorly reported. We judged only 14 studies in meta‐analyses as at low risk of bias for all domains and, on average, we considered 33% of studies in analyses of primary outcomes at high risk of bias. Is physical rehabilitation more effective than no (or minimal) physical rehabilitation? Compared to no physical rehabilitation, physical rehabilitation may improve IADL (standardised mean difference (SMD) 1.32, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08 to 1.56; 52 studies, 5403 participants; low‐certainty evidence) and motor function (SMD 1.01, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.22; 50 studies, 5669 participants; low‐certainty evidence). There was evidence of long‐term benefits for these outcomes. Physical rehabilitation may improve balance (MD 4.54, 95% CI 1.36 to 7.72; 9 studies, 452 participants; low‐certainty evidence) and likely improves gait velocity (SMD 0.23, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.42; 18 studies, 1131 participants; moderate‐certainty evidence), but with no evidence of long‐term benefits. Is physical rehabilitation more effective than attention control? The evidence is very uncertain about the effects of physical rehabilitation, as compared to attention control, on IADL (SMD 0.91, 95% CI 0.06 to 1.75; 2 studies, 106 participants), motor function (SMD 0.13, 95% CI ‐0.13 to 0.38; 5 studies, 237 participants), and balance (MD 6.61, 95% CI ‐0.45 to 13.66; 4 studies, 240 participants). Physical rehabilitation likely improves gait speed when compared to attention control (SMD 0.34, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.54; 7 studies, 405 participants; moderate‐certainty evidence). Does additional physical rehabilitation improve outcomes? Additional physical rehabilitation may improve IADL (SMD 1.26, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.71; 21 studies, 1972 participants; low‐certainty evidence) and motor function (SMD 0.69, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.92; 22 studies, 1965 participants; low‐certainty evidence). Very few studies assessed these outcomes at long‐term follow‐up. Additional physical rehabilitation may improve balance (MD 5.74, 95% CI 3.78 to 7.71; 15 studies, 795 participants; low‐certainty evidence) and gait velocity (SMD 0.59, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.91; 19 studies, 1004 participants; low‐certainty evidence). Very few studies assessed these outcomes at long‐term follow‐up. Is any one approach to physical rehabilitation more effective than any other approach? Compared to other approaches, those that focus on functional task training may improve IADL (SMD 0.58, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.87; 22 studies, 1535 participants; low‐certainty evidence) and motor function (SMD 0.72, 95% CI 0.21 to 1.22; 20 studies, 1671 participants; very low‐certainty evidence) but the evidence in the latter is very uncertain. The benefit was sustained long‐term. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of functional task training on balance (MD 2.16, 95% CI ‐0.24 to 4.55) and gait velocity (SMD 0.28, 95% CI ‐0.01 to 0.56). Compared to other approaches, neurophysiological approaches may be less effective than other approaches in improving IADL (SMD ‐0.34, 95% CI ‐0.63 to ‐0.06; 14 studies, 737 participants; low‐certainty evidence), and there may be no difference in improving motor function (SMD ‐0.60, 95% CI ‐1.32 to 0.12; 13 studies, 663 participants; low‐certainty evidence), balance (MD ‐0.60, 95% CI ‐5.90 to 6.03; 9 studies, 292 participants; low‐certainty evidence), and gait velocity (SMD ‐0.17, 95% CI ‐0.62 to 0.27; 16 studies, 630 participants; very low‐certainty evidence), but the evidence is very uncertain about the effect on gait velocity. For all comparisons, the evidence is very uncertain about the effects of physical rehabilitation on adverse events and length of hospital stay. Authors' conclusions Physical rehabilitation, using a mix of different treatment components, likely improves recovery of function and mobility after stroke. Additional physical rehabilitation, delivered as an adjunct to 'usual' rehabilitation, may provide added benefits. Physical rehabilitation approaches that focus on functional task training may be useful. Neurophysiological approaches to physical rehabilitation may be no different from, or less effective than, other physical rehabilitation approaches. Certainty in this evidence is limited due to substantial heterogeneity, with mainly small studies and important differences between study populations and interventions. We feel it is unlikely that any studies published since November 2022 would alter our conclusions. Given the size of this review, future updates warrant consensus discussion amongst stakeholders to ensure the most relevant questions are explored for optimal decision‐making.
Article
Background: Previous systematic reviews and randomised controlled trials have investigated the effect of post-stroke trunk training. Findings suggest that trunk training improves trunk function and activity or the execution of a task or action by an individual. But it is unclear what effect trunk training has on daily life activities, quality of life, and other outcomes. Objectives: To assess the effectiveness of trunk training after stroke on activities of daily living (ADL), trunk function, arm-hand function or activity, standing balance, leg function, walking ability, and quality of life when comparing with both dose-matched as non-dose-matched control groups. Search methods: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and five other databases to 25 October 2021. We searched trial registries to identify additional relevant published, unpublished, and ongoing trials. We hand searched the bibliographies of included studies. Selection criteria: We selected randomised controlled trials comparing trunk training versus non-dose-matched or dose-matched control therapy including adults (18 years or older) with either ischaemic or haemorrhagic stroke. Outcome measures of trials included ADL, trunk function, arm-hand function or activity, standing balance, leg function, walking ability, and quality of life. Data collection and analysis: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Two main analyses were carried out. The first analysis included trials where the therapy duration of control intervention was non-dose-matched with the therapy duration of the experimental group and the second analysis where there was comparison with a dose-matched control intervention (equal therapy duration in both the control as in the experimental group). MAIN RESULTS: We included 68 trials with a total of 2585 participants. In the analysis of the non-dose-matched groups (pooling of all trials with different training duration in the experimental as in the control intervention), we could see that trunk training had a positive effect on ADL (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.96; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69 to 1.24; P < 0.001; 5 trials; 283 participants; very low-certainty evidence), trunk function (SMD 1.49, 95% CI 1.26 to 1.71; P < 0.001; 14 trials, 466 participants; very low-certainty evidence), arm-hand function (SMD 0.67, 95% CI 0.19 to 1.15; P = 0.006; 2 trials, 74 participants; low-certainty evidence), arm-hand activity (SMD 0.84, 95% CI 0.009 to 1.59; P = 0.03; 1 trial, 30 participants; very low-certainty evidence), standing balance (SMD 0.57, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.79; P < 0.001; 11 trials, 410 participants; very low-certainty evidence), leg function (SMD 1.10, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.63; P < 0.001; 1 trial, 64 participants; very low-certainty evidence), walking ability (SMD 0.73, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.94; P < 0.001; 11 trials, 383 participants; low-certainty evidence) and quality of life (SMD 0.50, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.89; P = 0.01; 2 trials, 108 participants; low-certainty evidence). Non-dose-matched trunk training led to no difference for the outcome serious adverse events (odds ratio: 7.94, 95% CI 0.16 to 400.89; 6 trials, 201 participants; very low-certainty evidence). In the analysis of the dose-matched groups (pooling of all trials with equal training duration in the experimental as in the control intervention), we saw that trunk training had a positive effect on trunk function (SMD 1.03, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.16; P < 0.001; 36 trials, 1217 participants; very low-certainty evidence), standing balance (SMD 1.00, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.15; P < 0.001; 22 trials, 917 participants; very low-certainty evidence), leg function (SMD 1.57, 95% CI 1.28 to 1.87; P < 0.001; 4 trials, 254 participants; very low-certainty evidence), walking ability (SMD 0.69, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.87; P < 0.001; 19 trials, 535 participants; low-certainty evidence) and quality of life (SMD 0.70, 95% CI 0.29 to 1.11; P < 0.001; 2 trials, 111 participants; low-certainty evidence), but not for ADL (SMD 0.10; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.17 to 0.37; P = 0.48; 9 trials; 229 participants; very low-certainty evidence), arm-hand function (SMD 0.76, 95% CI -0.18 to 1.70; P = 0.11; 1 trial, 19 participants; low-certainty evidence), arm-hand activity (SMD 0.17, 95% CI -0.21 to 0.56; P = 0.38; 3 trials, 112 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Trunk training also led to no difference for the outcome serious adverse events (odds ratio (OR): 7.39, 95% CI 0.15 to 372.38; 10 trials, 381 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Time post stroke led to a significant subgroup difference for standing balance (P < 0.001) in non-dose-matched therapy. In non-dose-matched therapy, different trunk therapy approaches had a significant effect on ADL (< 0.001), trunk function (P < 0.001) and standing balance (< 0.001). When participants received dose-matched therapy, analysis of subgroup differences showed that the trunk therapy approach had a significant effect on ADL (P = 0.001), trunk function (P < 0.001), arm-hand activity (P < 0.001), standing balance (P = 0.002), and leg function (P = 0.002). Also for dose-matched therapy, subgroup analysis for time post stroke resulted in a significant difference for the outcomes standing balance (P < 0.001), walking ability (P = 0.003) and leg function (P < 0.001), time post stroke significantly modified the effect of intervention. Core-stability trunk (15 trials), selective-trunk (14 trials) and unstable-trunk (16 trials) training approaches were mostly applied in the included trials. Authors' conclusions: There is evidence to suggest that trunk training as part of rehabilitation improves ADL, trunk function, standing balance, walking ability, upper and lower limb function, and quality of life in people after stroke. Core-stability, selective-, and unstable-trunk training were the trunk training approaches mostly applied in the included trials. When considering only trials with a low risk of bias, results were mostly confirmed, with very low to moderate certainty, depending on the outcome.
Chapter
In two freestanding volumes, Textbook of Neural Repair and Rehabilitation provides comprehensive coverage of the science and practice of neurological rehabilitation. Revised throughout, bringing the book fully up to date, this volume, Medical Neurorehabilitation, can stand alone as a clinical handbook for neurorehabilitation. It covers the practical applications of the basic science principles presented in Volume 1, provides authoritative guidelines on the management of disabling symptoms, and describes comprehensive rehabilitation approaches for the major categories of disabling neurological disorders. New chapters have been added covering genetics in neurorehabilitation, the rehabilitation team and the economics of neurological rehabilitation, and brain stimulation, along with numerous others. Emphasizing the integration of basic and clinical knowledge, this book and its companion are edited and written by leading international authorities. Together they are an essential resource for neuroscientists and provide a foundation of the work of clinical neurorehabilitation professionals.
Article
Full-text available
A medical condition that occurs due to interrupted blood supply to the brain leading to restricted oxygen supply to the tissues resulting in cell death is known as “stroke”. It is considered as a second leading cause of death globally and a major cause of disabilities for the patients surviving from its fatality. Monoplegia, Diplegia, Hemiplegia, Quadriplegia, hemiparesis are all the different gifts of the stroke given to multiple patients suffering from it. Objective: The aim of the study was to evaluate the difference between the hemiplegic stroke patients who have undergone physical therapy treatment in contrast to those patients who have not taken any physical therapy treatment. Methods: Cross sectional study design was selected for the performance of the research. Research setting was a Government Sector Hospital. Specific balance and coordination exercises were given to the hemiplegic stroke patients and their effect was observed in the term of their recovery speed. Out of sample of 40 individuals, some have taken physical therapy rehabilitation with varying number of sessions and intensity of exercises while in contrast, some have not taken any physical therapy from scratch following stroke. Brunel Balance Assessment (BBA) scale was measured in relation to the effect of exercises given to the patients. Results: The data analysis has shown significant improvement in balance and different fine motor movements in post training group as compared to those who have not taken physical therapy rehabilitation. Data analysis has clearly shown that percentage of improvement in the condition of patients is directly related to the frequency of exercise given to them in their post stroke period. The BBA scale was having higher values in the patients undergoing physical therapy rehabilitation as compared to the patients who have not undergone any sort of physical therapy rehabilitation. Conclusion: Balance and coordination exercises have impact in the post hemiplegic stroke patients
Article
Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of interactive video games (IVGs) in rehabilitation motivation and walking and balance abilities in chronic stroke patients. Materials and Methods: In this dual-center controlled trial, 24 chronic stroke patients from rehabilitation centers A and B were randomly assigned to an experimental (IVGs + traditional neurodevelopment treatment [TNT], n = 12) or a control group (walking training + TNT, n = 12). The patients in both the groups underwent TNT for 4 weeks (5 days/week) before undergoing either IVGs or walking training (4 weeks, 3 days/week) depending on the group. The primary and secondary outcomes were rehabilitation motivation and the Berg Balance Scale (BBS) score, Functional Reach Test (FRT) performance, and walking speed (WS), respectively. Results: The patients in both the groups showed significant increase in the BBS score, FRT performance, and WS; however, the experimental group showed more significant improvements in rehabilitation motivation (P = 0.02, η2 = 0.415) and WS (P = 0.05, η2 = 0.333) than the patients in the control group. Conclusion: This study suggests that the IVGs in combination with TNT provide effective rehabilitation motivation in chronic stroke patients. Clinical Trial Registration number: KCT0003408.
Article
A descriptive study of the biomechanical variables of the walking patterns of the fit and healthy elderly compared with those of young adults revealed several significant differences. The walking patterns of 15 elderly subjects, selected for their active life style and screened for any gait- or balance-related pathological conditions, were analyzed. Kinematic and kinetic data for a minimum of 10 repeat walking trials were collected using a video digitizing system and a force platform. Basic kinematic analyses and an inverse dynamics model yielded data based on the following variables: temporal and cadence measures, heal and toe trajectories, joint kinematics, joint moments of force, and joint mechanical power generation and absorption. Significant differences between these elderly subjects and a database of young adults revealed the following: the same cadence but a shorter step length, an increased double-support stance period, decreased push-off power, a more flat-footed landing, and a reduction in their “index of dynamic balance.” All of these differences, except reduction in index of dynamic balance, indicate adaptation by the elderly toward a safer, more stable gait pattern. The reduction in index of dynamic balance suggests deterioration in the efficiency of the balance control system during gait. Because of these significant differences attributable to age alone, it is apparent that a separate gait database is needed in order to pinpoint falling disorders of the elderly.
Article
Objective. – The aim of this study was the assessment of visual biofeedback in the management of balance disorders after stroke.Material and methods. – This is a prospective randomised trial, which compares visual biofeedback training and traditional balance training. Twenty-seven patients took part in this study: 13 in the first group and 14 in the second group. The rehabilitation program in the first group consists in an association of visual biofeedback and traditional training during 3 weeks. For the second group traditional training was used alone. Clinical, functional and forceplate assessements were performed before and after the program of rehabilitation.Results. – All the patients had a clinical and functional improvement. However, patients who have benefited from biofeedback training had a significant improvement of the forceplate parameters with closed eyes.Discussion and conclusion. – Those results confirm the interest of rehabilitation in balance disorders after stroke. The use of biofeedback training incorporated into functional physiotherapy affords added benefits probably by a best integration of proprioceptive informations.
Article
The article discusses the problem of determining the number of observations required by some common nonparametric tests, so that the tests have power at least 1 – β against alternatives that differ sufficiently from the hypothesis being tested. It is shown that the number of observations depends on certain simple probabilities. A method is suggested for fixing the value of the appropriate probability when determining sample size.
Article
Objectives: To describe the incidence, circumstances, and consequences of falls in patients admitted in a rehabilitation ward after a stroke. Methods: Prospective monitoring of falls over four years in a neurological rehabilitation unit. Use of fall registry. Inclusion criteria: age < 75 years, admission < 45 days after stroke onset, single stroke of 1 cerebral hemisphere (nonlacunar) or of the brain stem. Only falls due to loss of balance were considered; falls caused by a seizure or syncope were not considered. Results: Of 217 consecutive patients with the inclusion criteria, 34 had fallen at least once (15.7%) and 10 twice (4.1%). Fall incidence, defined as the number of falls per patient per day was 2.2 per thousand. Half of the patients fell the first three weeks after admission. Most falls involved getting to or from the wheelchair or the bed; 1 patient had recovered minimal postural abilities at the gym but was not independent. Traumatic lesions were noted in 13 patients: they were minor in nine and severe in four, including three fractures. Conclusion: Falls due to loss of balance are a major problem in patients undergoing rehabilitation after a stroke. Getting to and from wheelchairs in the bedroom and bathroom by patients who are not allowed to do so play a key role in many falls. Prevention programs should consider this information.
Article
The Bells Test, a cancellation task, permits a quantitative and qualitative evaluation of visual neglect. The construction of the test allows for rapid visualization of the spatial distribution of the omitted targets and their quantification. The examiner can also obtain a qualitative picture through an approximation of the visual scanning pattern used by the subject; this provides valuable information on 'how' the task is performed. In summary, the Bells Test is a more dynamic, and thus, more sensitive clinical examination for visual neglect.
Article
Two tests of visual field dependence (a measure of reliance upon the spatial framework provided by vision in the perception of the upright)--roll vection and the rod and frame test--were administered to 136 participants aged fifty-nine to ninety-seven years. It was found that the fifty-nine participants who had experienced one or more falls in the past year were significantly more visually field dependent in both tests compared with the seventy-seven participants who had not fallen. Mean error in perception of the true vertical in the rod and frame test was 20.7 degrees for the fallers and 17.2 degrees for the non-fallers. Mean error in perception of the true vertical in the roll vection test was 6.6 degrees for the fallers and 3.6 degrees for the non-fallers. The test of roll vection was the better discriminator between fallers and non-fallers, which may be due in part to less misunderstanding of the required task by the participant. The results suggest that tilted or rolling visual stimuli may be factors leading to postural instability and falls in the elderly. The findings support the claim that greater dependence on visual information shown by fallers may be the result of reduced proprioceptive and vestibular function resulting from increased age and chronic health problems.
Article
This article reviews the basic concepts underlying the balance system, describes the information provided by dynamic posturography, and explains how the technique complements and expands on the information provided by traditional tests of vestibular function.