Effectiveness of digital home rehabilitation and supervision for stroke survivors: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Ann Marie Hestetun-Mandrup,Zheng An Toh,Hui Xian Oh,Hong-Gu He,Anne Catrine Trægde Martinsen,Minna Pikkarainen
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/20552076241256861
2024-06-03
Abstract:Objective: Stroke survivors often experience residual impairments and motor decline post-discharge. While digital home rehabilitation combined with supervision could be a promising approach for reducing human resources, increasing motor ability, and supporting rehabilitation persistence there is a lack of reviews synthesizing the effects. Thus, this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to synthesize the effect of digital home rehabilitation and supervision in improving motor ability of upper limb, static balance, stroke-related quality of life, and self-reported arm function among stroke survivors. Methods: Six electronic databases, grey literature, ongoing studies, and reference lists were searched for relevant studies. Two investigators independently reviewed titles, abstracts, screened full texts for eligibility and performed data extraction. Meta-analysis of 13 independent studies were grouped into four separate meta-analyses. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessments, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) tool was used for evaluating the overall quality of the evidence. Results: Meta-analyses showed no statistically significant difference between intervention (digital home rehabilitation) and control groups (home training/clinic-based) of all outcomes including motor ability of upper limb, static balance, stroke-related quality of life, and self-reported arm function. In the sub-group analysis digital home rehabilitation was associated with better quality of arm use (standardized mean difference = 0.68, 95% confidence interval: [0.27, 1.09], p = 0.001). Conclusions: This result indicated that digital home rehabilitation has similar effects and could potentially replace home training or clinic-based services. This review highlights better-targeted digital motor interventions to examine the effects of interventions further. The quality of evidence was moderate to high in motor and self-reported arm outcomes, and low for balance and quality of life.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?