RESUMEN
The scientific literature on poststroke rehabilitation is remarkably vast. Over the last decades, dozens of rehabilitation approaches have been investigated. However, sometimes it is challenging to trace new experimental interventions back to some of the known models of motor control and sensorimotor learning. This scoping review aimed to investigate motor control models' diffusion among the literature on motor recovery after stroke. We performed a literature search on Medline, Cochrane, Web of Science, Embase, and Scopus databases. The last search was conducted in September 2023. This scoping review included full-text articles published in English in peer-reviewed journals that provided rehabilitation interventions based on motor control or motor learning frameworks for at least one individual with stroke. For each study, we identified the theoretical framework the authors used to design the experimental treatment. To this aim, we used a previously proposed classification of the known models of motor control, dividing them into the following categories: neuroanatomy, robotics, self-organization, and ecological context. In total, 2,185 studies were originally considered in this scoping review. After the screening process, we included and analyzed 45 studies: 20 studies were randomized controlled trials, 12 were case series, 4 were case reports, 8 were observational longitudinal pilot studies, and 1 was an uncontrolled trial. Only 10 studies explicitly declared the reference theoretical model. Considering their classification, 21 studies referred to the robotics motor control model, 12 to the self-organization model, 8 to the neuroanatomy model, and 4 to the ecological model. Our results showed that most of the rehabilitative interventions purposed in stroke rehabilitation have no clear theoretical bases on motor control and motor learning models. We suggest this is an issue that deserves attention when designing new experimental interventions in stroke rehabilitation.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Robot-based treatments are developing in neurorehabilitation settings. Recently, the Italian National Health Systems recognized robot-based rehabilitation as a refundable service. Thus, the Italian neurorehabilitation community promoted a national consensus on this topic. OBJECTIVE: To conceptualize undisclosed perspectives for research and applications of robotics for neurorehabilitation, based on a qualitative synthesis of reference theoretical models. METHODS: A scoping review was carried out based on a specific question from the consensus Jury. A foreground search strategy was developed on theoretical models (context) of robot-based rehabilitation (exposure), in neurological patients (population). PubMed and EMBASE® databases were searched and studies on theoretical models of motor control, neurobiology of recovery, human-robot interaction and economic sustainability were included, while experimental studies not aimed to investigate theoretical frameworks, or considering prosthetics, were excluded. RESULTS: Overall, 3699 records were screened and finally 9 papers included according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. According to the population investigated, structured information on theoretical models and indications for future research was summarized in a synoptic table. CONCLUSION: The main indication from the Italian consensus on robotics in neurorehabilitation is the priority to design research studies aimed to investigate the role of robotic and electromechanical devices in promoting neuroplasticity.