Biofeedback improves activities of the lower limb after stroke: A systematic review

Rosalyn Stanton, Louise Ada, Catherine M. Dean, Elisabeth Preston

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

Question: Is biofeedback during the practice of lower limb activities after stroke effective in improving performance of those activities, and are any benefits maintained after intervention ceases? Design: Systematic review with meta-analysis of randomised trials. Participants: People who have had a stroke. Intervention: Biofeedback during practice of sitting, standing up, standing, or walking. Outcome measures: Continuous measures of activity congruent with the activity trained. Results: 22 trials met the inclusion criteria and 19 contained data suitable for analysis. Effect sizes were calculated as standardised mean differences because different outcome measures were used. Since inclusion of all trials produced substantial statistical heterogeneity, only trials with a PEDro score >4 (11 trials) were included in the final analysis (mean PEDro score 5.7). In the short-term, biofeedback improved lower limb activities compared with usual therapy/placebo (SMD = 0.49, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.75). Lower limb activities were still improved compared with usual therapy/placebo 1 to 5 months after the cessation of intervention (SMD = 0.41, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.75). Conclusion: Augmenting feedback through the use of biofeedback is superior to usual therapy/placebo at improving lower limb activities in people following stroke. Furthermore, these benefits are largely maintained in the longer term. Given that many biofeedback machines are relatively inexpensive, biofeedback could be utilised more widely in clinical practice.

LanguageEnglish
Pages145-155
Number of pages11
JournalJournal of Physiotherapy
Volume57
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Sep 2011
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Lower Extremity
Stroke
Placebos
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Walking
Meta-Analysis
Therapeutics

Bibliographical note

Copyright the Publisher [2011]. Version archived for private and non-commercial use with the permission of the author/s and according to publisher conditions. For further rights please contact the publisher.

Keywords

  • Exercise therapy
  • Meta-analysis
  • Physical therapy techniques
  • Randomized controlled trials
  • Rehabilitation
  • Review systematic
  • Stroke

Cite this

Stanton, Rosalyn ; Ada, Louise ; Dean, Catherine M. ; Preston, Elisabeth. / Biofeedback improves activities of the lower limb after stroke : A systematic review. In: Journal of Physiotherapy. 2011 ; Vol. 57, No. 3. pp. 145-155.
@article{73d54d49e33348fc88fcfdce1dd8ab41,
title = "Biofeedback improves activities of the lower limb after stroke: A systematic review",
abstract = "Question: Is biofeedback during the practice of lower limb activities after stroke effective in improving performance of those activities, and are any benefits maintained after intervention ceases? Design: Systematic review with meta-analysis of randomised trials. Participants: People who have had a stroke. Intervention: Biofeedback during practice of sitting, standing up, standing, or walking. Outcome measures: Continuous measures of activity congruent with the activity trained. Results: 22 trials met the inclusion criteria and 19 contained data suitable for analysis. Effect sizes were calculated as standardised mean differences because different outcome measures were used. Since inclusion of all trials produced substantial statistical heterogeneity, only trials with a PEDro score >4 (11 trials) were included in the final analysis (mean PEDro score 5.7). In the short-term, biofeedback improved lower limb activities compared with usual therapy/placebo (SMD = 0.49, 95{\%} CI 0.22 to 0.75). Lower limb activities were still improved compared with usual therapy/placebo 1 to 5 months after the cessation of intervention (SMD = 0.41, 95{\%} CI 0.06 to 0.75). Conclusion: Augmenting feedback through the use of biofeedback is superior to usual therapy/placebo at improving lower limb activities in people following stroke. Furthermore, these benefits are largely maintained in the longer term. Given that many biofeedback machines are relatively inexpensive, biofeedback could be utilised more widely in clinical practice.",
keywords = "Exercise therapy, Meta-analysis, Physical therapy techniques, Randomized controlled trials, Rehabilitation, Review systematic, Stroke",
author = "Rosalyn Stanton and Louise Ada and Dean, {Catherine M.} and Elisabeth Preston",
note = "Copyright the Publisher [2011]. Version archived for private and non-commercial use with the permission of the author/s and according to publisher conditions. For further rights please contact the publisher.",
year = "2011",
month = "9",
doi = "10.1016/S1836-9553(11)70035-2",
language = "English",
volume = "57",
pages = "145--155",
journal = "Journal of Physiotherapy",
issn = "1836-9553",
publisher = "Australian Physiotherapy Association",
number = "3",

}

Biofeedback improves activities of the lower limb after stroke : A systematic review. / Stanton, Rosalyn; Ada, Louise; Dean, Catherine M.; Preston, Elisabeth.

In: Journal of Physiotherapy, Vol. 57, No. 3, 09.2011, p. 145-155.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Biofeedback improves activities of the lower limb after stroke

T2 - Journal of Physiotherapy

AU - Stanton, Rosalyn

AU - Ada, Louise

AU - Dean, Catherine M.

AU - Preston, Elisabeth

N1 - Copyright the Publisher [2011]. Version archived for private and non-commercial use with the permission of the author/s and according to publisher conditions. For further rights please contact the publisher.

PY - 2011/9

Y1 - 2011/9

N2 - Question: Is biofeedback during the practice of lower limb activities after stroke effective in improving performance of those activities, and are any benefits maintained after intervention ceases? Design: Systematic review with meta-analysis of randomised trials. Participants: People who have had a stroke. Intervention: Biofeedback during practice of sitting, standing up, standing, or walking. Outcome measures: Continuous measures of activity congruent with the activity trained. Results: 22 trials met the inclusion criteria and 19 contained data suitable for analysis. Effect sizes were calculated as standardised mean differences because different outcome measures were used. Since inclusion of all trials produced substantial statistical heterogeneity, only trials with a PEDro score >4 (11 trials) were included in the final analysis (mean PEDro score 5.7). In the short-term, biofeedback improved lower limb activities compared with usual therapy/placebo (SMD = 0.49, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.75). Lower limb activities were still improved compared with usual therapy/placebo 1 to 5 months after the cessation of intervention (SMD = 0.41, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.75). Conclusion: Augmenting feedback through the use of biofeedback is superior to usual therapy/placebo at improving lower limb activities in people following stroke. Furthermore, these benefits are largely maintained in the longer term. Given that many biofeedback machines are relatively inexpensive, biofeedback could be utilised more widely in clinical practice.

AB - Question: Is biofeedback during the practice of lower limb activities after stroke effective in improving performance of those activities, and are any benefits maintained after intervention ceases? Design: Systematic review with meta-analysis of randomised trials. Participants: People who have had a stroke. Intervention: Biofeedback during practice of sitting, standing up, standing, or walking. Outcome measures: Continuous measures of activity congruent with the activity trained. Results: 22 trials met the inclusion criteria and 19 contained data suitable for analysis. Effect sizes were calculated as standardised mean differences because different outcome measures were used. Since inclusion of all trials produced substantial statistical heterogeneity, only trials with a PEDro score >4 (11 trials) were included in the final analysis (mean PEDro score 5.7). In the short-term, biofeedback improved lower limb activities compared with usual therapy/placebo (SMD = 0.49, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.75). Lower limb activities were still improved compared with usual therapy/placebo 1 to 5 months after the cessation of intervention (SMD = 0.41, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.75). Conclusion: Augmenting feedback through the use of biofeedback is superior to usual therapy/placebo at improving lower limb activities in people following stroke. Furthermore, these benefits are largely maintained in the longer term. Given that many biofeedback machines are relatively inexpensive, biofeedback could be utilised more widely in clinical practice.

KW - Exercise therapy

KW - Meta-analysis

KW - Physical therapy techniques

KW - Randomized controlled trials

KW - Rehabilitation

KW - Review systematic

KW - Stroke

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=80052472624&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/S1836-9553(11)70035-2

DO - 10.1016/S1836-9553(11)70035-2

M3 - Article

VL - 57

SP - 145

EP - 155

JO - Journal of Physiotherapy

JF - Journal of Physiotherapy

SN - 1836-9553

IS - 3

ER -