FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2022028058> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2022028058 endingPage "2000" @default.
• W2022028058 startingPage "1999" @default.
• W2022028058 abstract "HomeStrokeVol. 38, No. 6Electromyographic Biofeedback for the Recovery of Motor Function After Stroke Free AccessReview ArticlePDF/EPUBAboutView PDFView EPUBSections ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload citationsTrack citationsPermissions ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InMendeleyReddit Jump toFree AccessReview ArticlePDF/EPUBElectromyographic Biofeedback for the Recovery of Motor Function After Stroke Henry J. Woodford, BSc, MRCP and Christopher Price, MD, MRCP Henry J. WoodfordHenry J. Woodford From the Cumberland Infirmary (H.J.W.), Cumbria, UK; and the Northumbria Healthcare Trust (C.P.), Northumberland, UK. Search for more papers by this author and Christopher PriceChristopher Price From the Cumberland Infirmary (H.J.W.), Cumbria, UK; and the Northumbria Healthcare Trust (C.P.), Northumberland, UK. Search for more papers by this author Originally published19 Apr 2007https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.107.482687Stroke. 2007;38:1999–2000Other version(s) of this articleYou are viewing the most recent version of this article. Previous versions: April 19, 2007: Previous Version 1 The specific objective of this review was to determine the efficacy of any form of electromyographic biofeedback (EMG-BFB) used after a stroke in order to aid motor function recovery.Search StrategyWe searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched March 30, 2006), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; The Cochrane Library Issue 4, 2005), MEDLINE (1966 to November 2005), EMBASE (1980 to November 2005), CINAHL (1983 to November 2005), PsycINFO (1974 to November 2005) and First Search (1966 to November 2005). We scanned reference lists for relevant articles and contacted equipment manufacturers and distributorsSelection CriteriaRandomized and quasirandomized studies comparing EMG-BFB with control for motor function recovery in stroke patients.Data Collection & AnalysisTwo review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Where possible we contacted study authors for further information. Any reported adverse effects were noted.Main ResultsThirteen trials involving 269 people were included. All trials compared EMG-BFB plus standard physiotherapy to standard physiotherapy either alone or with sham EMG-BFB. Only 1 study used a motor strength assessment scale for evaluation of patients, which indicated benefit from EMG-BFB (weighted mean difference 1.09; 95% CI, 0.48 to 1.70). EMG-BFB did not have a significant benefit in improving range of motion through the ankle (standardized mean difference 0.05; 95% CI, −0.36 to 0.46), knee or wrist joints. However, 1 trial suggested a benefit in range of motion at the shoulder (standardized mean difference 0.88; 95% CI, 0.07 to 1.70). Change in stride length or gait speed was not improved by EMG-BFB. Two studies used different assessment scores to quantify gait quality. One of these suggested a beneficial effect of EMG-BFB (standardized mean difference 0.90; 95% CI, 0.01 to 1.78). Most of the studies examining functional outcomes used different assessment scales, which made meta-analysis impossible. Two studies that used the same scale did show a beneficial effect (standardized mean difference 0.69; 95% CI, 0.15 to 1.23; Figure). Download figureDownload PowerPointImplications for PracticeWhen all the available data are combined, EMG-BFB does not appear to have any positive benefit for recovery after stroke. It cannot be recommended as a routine treatment. A small amount of evidence from individual studies suggests that using EMG-BFB in combination with standard physiotherapy regimes may result in improvements in motor power, range of motion at the shoulder, functional recovery and gait quality beyond those of standard physiotherapy alone. Because there were no reported adverse effects, it would seem reasonable for EMG-BFB to be considered as a cautious treatment approach for individual patients whose circumstances match the inclusion criteria of the studies included in this review.Implications for ResearchThere is need for a randomized clinical trial with adequate power, using standardized assessment scales and robust adverse event reporting, to assess the effectiveness of EMG-BFB.FootnotesCorrespondence to Henry J. Woodford, Cumberland Infirmary, Newtown Rd, Carlisle, Cumbria, UK CA2 7HY. E-mail [email protected] Previous Back to top Next FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited By Ozturk O and Yapici M Surface Electromyography With Wearable Graphene Textiles, IEEE Sensors Journal, 10.1109/JSEN.2020.3048924, 21:13, (14397-14406) Gallina A, Gazzoni M, Falla D and Merletti R (2016) Surface EMG Biofeedback Surface Electromyography : Physiology, Engineering, and Applications, 10.1002/9781119082934.ch18, (485-500) Li S, Shi Z, Zhang H, Liu X, Chen S, Jin J, Wang Y, Jia W and Li H (2013) Assessing gait impairment after permanent middle cerebral artery occlusion in rats using an automated computer-aided control system, Behavioural Brain Research, 10.1016/j.bbr.2013.04.044, 250, (174-191), Online publication date: 1-Aug-2013. June 2007Vol 38, Issue 6 Advertisement Article InformationMetrics https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.107.482687 Manuscript receivedJanuary 23, 2007Manuscript acceptedMarch 1, 2007Originally publishedApril 19, 2007 Keywordsstroke recoverybiofeedbackEMGrehabilitationphysiotherapystrokePDF download Advertisement" @default.
• W2022028058 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2022028058 creator A5021482669 @default.
• W2022028058 creator A5051785683 @default.
• W2022028058 date "2007-06-01" @default.
• W2022028058 modified "2023-09-26" @default.
• W2022028058 title "Electromyographic Biofeedback for the Recovery of Motor Function After Stroke" @default.
• W2022028058 doi "https://doi.org/10.1161/strokeaha.107.482687" @default.
• W2022028058 hasPublicationYear "2007" @default.
• W2022028058 type Work @default.
• W2022028058 sameAs 2022028058 @default.
• W2022028058 citedByCount "5" @default.
• W2022028058 countsByYear W20220280582013 @default.
• W2022028058 countsByYear W20220280582014 @default.
• W2022028058 countsByYear W20220280582016 @default.
• W2022028058 countsByYear W20220280582021 @default.
• W2022028058 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2022028058 hasAuthorship W2022028058A5021482669 @default.
• W2022028058 hasAuthorship W2022028058A5051785683 @default.
• W2022028058 hasBestOaLocation W20220280581 @default.
• W2022028058 hasConcept C118552586 @default.
• W2022028058 hasConcept C127413603 @default.
• W2022028058 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W2022028058 hasConcept C168563851 @default.
• W2022028058 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2022028058 hasConcept C1862650 @default.
• W2022028058 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2022028058 hasConcept C27415008 @default.
• W2022028058 hasConcept C2776377089 @default.
• W2022028058 hasConcept C2776478404 @default.
• W2022028058 hasConcept C2779473830 @default.
• W2022028058 hasConcept C2779549880 @default.
• W2022028058 hasConcept C2780645631 @default.
• W2022028058 hasConcept C2781145037 @default.
• W2022028058 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2022028058 hasConcept C78519656 @default.
• W2022028058 hasConcept C99508421 @default.
• W2022028058 hasConceptScore W2022028058C118552586 @default.
• W2022028058 hasConceptScore W2022028058C127413603 @default.
• W2022028058 hasConceptScore W2022028058C141071460 @default.
• W2022028058 hasConceptScore W2022028058C168563851 @default.
• W2022028058 hasConceptScore W2022028058C17744445 @default.
• W2022028058 hasConceptScore W2022028058C1862650 @default.
• W2022028058 hasConceptScore W2022028058C199539241 @default.
• W2022028058 hasConceptScore W2022028058C27415008 @default.
• W2022028058 hasConceptScore W2022028058C2776377089 @default.
• W2022028058 hasConceptScore W2022028058C2776478404 @default.
• W2022028058 hasConceptScore W2022028058C2779473830 @default.
• W2022028058 hasConceptScore W2022028058C2779549880 @default.
• W2022028058 hasConceptScore W2022028058C2780645631 @default.
• W2022028058 hasConceptScore W2022028058C2781145037 @default.
• W2022028058 hasConceptScore W2022028058C71924100 @default.
• W2022028058 hasConceptScore W2022028058C78519656 @default.
• W2022028058 hasConceptScore W2022028058C99508421 @default.
• W2022028058 hasIssue "6" @default.
• W2022028058 hasLocation W20220280581 @default.
• W2022028058 hasOpenAccess W2022028058 @default.
• W2022028058 hasPrimaryLocation W20220280581 @default.
• W2022028058 hasRelatedWork W2168483977 @default.
• W2022028058 hasRelatedWork W2619428723 @default.
• W2022028058 hasRelatedWork W2767101331 @default.
• W2022028058 hasRelatedWork W2981900262 @default.
• W2022028058 hasRelatedWork W2986202580 @default.
• W2022028058 hasRelatedWork W3016761009 @default.
• W2022028058 hasRelatedWork W3018781222 @default.
• W2022028058 hasRelatedWork W3035277694 @default.
• W2022028058 hasRelatedWork W3036778824 @default.
• W2022028058 hasRelatedWork W3126284041 @default.
• W2022028058 hasVolume "38" @default.
• W2022028058 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2022028058 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2022028058 magId "2022028058" @default.
• W2022028058 workType "article" @default.