Evidence for the retraining of sensation after stroke: a systematic review

Schabrun, S. M. and Hillier, S. (2009) Evidence for the retraining of sensation after stroke: a systematic review. Clinical Rehabilitation, 23 1: 27-39. doi:10.1177/0269215508098897


Author Schabrun, S. M.
Hillier, S.
Title Evidence for the retraining of sensation after stroke: a systematic review
Journal name Clinical Rehabilitation   Check publisher's open access policy
ISSN 0269-2155
1477-0873
Publication date 2009-01
Sub-type Article (original research)
DOI 10.1177/0269215508098897
Volume 23
Issue 1
Start page 27
End page 39
Total pages 13
Place of publication London, United Kingdom
Publisher Sage Publications
Language eng
Abstract Objective: Retraining of sensory function following stroke is frequently overlooked in rehabilitation protocols despite more than 60% of patients presenting with sensory deficits. Methods to train sensory function include both passive and active training protocols. Here we examined the volume and quality of the evidence available for both passive and active sensory training following stroke. In addition, we aimed to quantify the effect of sensory training on impairment and function. Data sources: Databases searched included MEDLINE, AMED, CINAHL, Academic search elite, Scopus and the Cochrane library. Unpublished articles were identified using a search engine. Review methods: Studies utilizing passive or active sensory training paradigms post stroke were identified. Methodological quality was examined using the National Health and Medical Research Council hierarchy of evidence and the McMaster University critical appraisal tool. Results: Fourteen studies met the inclusion criteria; 8 examined passive and 6 active sensory training. Methodological quality scores ranged from 11 to 18.5 (maximum 20). Meta-analysis was performed using three studies examining hand function, demonstrating a moderate effect in favour of passive sensory training. Other studies were unable to be pooled due to heterogeneity of measures or insufficient data. Conclusion: Meta-analyses and single studies offer some support for the effectiveness of passive sensory training in relation to sensory impairment and motor function. However, empirical evidence for active sensory training is limited. Further high-quality studies with greater statistical power and meaningful clinical measures are required in order to accurately determine the effectiveness of sensory retraining following stroke.
Keyword CONTROLLED PILOT TRIAL
SOMATOSENSORY STIMULATION
ELECTRICAL-STIMULATION
HAND
RECOVERY
Q-Index Code C1
Q-Index Status Provisional Code
Institutional Status Non-UQ

Document type: Journal Article
Sub-type: Article (original research)
Collection: School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences Publications
 
Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 51 times in Thomson Reuters Web of Science Article | Citations
Scopus Citation Count Cited 60 times in Scopus Article | Citations
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Created: Fri, 04 Feb 2011, 14:56:16 EST