Evaluation of an upper limb robotic rehabilitation program on motor functions, quality of life, cognition, and emotional status in patients with stroke: a randomized controlled study.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to find out whether including robotic therapy in addition to a conventional rehabilitation program affects the quality of life, motor function, cognition, and emotional status of hemiplegic patients. DESIGN: Thirty-seven stroke patients recruited between April 2016 and April 2019 were included in the study. The patients were randomized into 2 groups (Robotic rehabilitation group-RR n:17, Control group n:20), RR was arranged to be 30-45 min, 5 days per week for 4 weeks. All patients were assessed at the beginning of therapy and the end of 4th week with Brunnstrom stages of motor recovery, Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA), handgrip strength, Purdue peg test, Minnesota manual dexterity test, Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS), Functional Independence Measure (FIM), Stroke Specific Quality of Life Scale (SS-QOL), Nottingham Extended Activities of Daily Living (NEADL) Scale, Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES- D). RESULTS: Improvements in motor function scores, spasticity, general functioning, activities of daily living, cognitive assessment were better in the robotic group when compared to the control group but this difference was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). Improvement in the CES-D in the RR-group was better in comparison to the control group (p = 0.018). CONCLUSION: Improvements in motor functions were observed after the treatment in both groups. Although RR group improved better in numbers, none of the outcomes except the CES-D scale were significant. Robotic rehabilitation provides a favorable alternative bringing slight benefits, and also is advantageous in terms of work power and psychological recovery, making its addition to conventional neurological rehabilitation effective and useful in patient management after stroke. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04393480.

Does the Use of Electrotherapies Increase the Effectiveness of Neck Stabilization Exercises for Improving Pain, Disability, Mood, and Quality of Life in Chronic Neck Pain?: A Randomized, Controlled, Single-Blind Study.

STUDY DESIGN: This study was a prospective, randomized, controlled study. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine whether transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) or interferential current (IFC) increase the effectiveness of neck stabilization exercises (NSEs) on pain, disability, mood and quality of life for chronic neck pain (CNP). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Neck pain is one of the three most frequently reported complaints of the musculoskeletal system. Electrotherapies, such as IFC and TENS, have been applied solo or combined with exercise for management of neck pain; however, the efficacy of these combinations is unclear. METHODS: A total of 81 patients with CNP were included in this study. Patients were randomly assigned into three groups regarding age and gender. First group had NSE, second group had TENS and NSE, and third group had IFC and NSE. Pain levels [visual analogue scale (VAS)], limits of cervical range of motion (ROM), quality of life (short form-36), mood (Beck depression inventory), levels of disability (Neck Pain and Disability Index), and the need for analgesics of all patients were evaluated before treatment, at 6th and 12th week follow-up. Physical therapy modalities were applied for 15 sessions in all groups. All participants had group exercise accompanied by a physiotherapist for 3 weeks and an additional 3 weeks of home exercise program. RESULTS: According to the intragroup assessment, the study achieved its purpose of pain reduction, ROM increase, improvement of disability, quality of life, mood and reduction in drug use in all three treatment groups (P < 0.05). However, clinical outcomes at 6th and 12 th week had no significant difference among the three groups (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: TENS and IFC therapies are effective in the treatment of CNP patients. However, they have no additional benefit or superiority over NSE. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2.