Abstract：
BACKGROUND: Home-based rehabilitation is a cost-effective means of making services available for patients. The aim of this study is to determine the evidence in the literature on the effects of home-based neurostimulation in patients with stroke.
METHODS: We searched PubMED, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and CENTRAL for randomized controlled trials on the subject matter using keywords such as stroke, electrical stimulation and transcranial direct current stimulation. Information on participants\' characteristics and mean scores on the outcomes of interest were extracted. Risks of bias and methodological quality of the included studies were assessed using Cochrane Risks of bias tool and PEDro scale respectively. The data was analyzed using both narrative and quantitative syntheses. In the quantitative synthesis, meta-analysis was carried out using random effect model analysis.
RESULTS: The results showed that, home-based neurostimulation is superior to the control at improving upper limb muscle strength (SMD = 0.72, 95% CI = 0.08 to 1.32, p = 0.03), functional mobility (SMD = -0.39, 95% CI = -0.65 to 0.14, p = 0.003) and walking endurance (SMD = 0.33, 95% CI = 0.08 to 0.59, p = 0.01) post intervention; and upper limb motor function (SMD = 0.9, 95% CI = 0.10 to 1.70, p = 0.03), functional mobility (SMD = -0.30, 95% CI = -0.56 to -0.05, p = 0.02) and walking endurance (SMD = 0.33, 95% CI = 0.08 to 0.59, p = 0.01) at follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS: Home-based neurostimulation can be used to improve upper and lower limb function after stroke.
METHODS: We searched PubMED, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and CENTRAL for randomized controlled trials on the subject matter using keywords such as stroke, electrical stimulation and transcranial direct current stimulation. Information on participants\' characteristics and mean scores on the outcomes of interest were extracted. Risks of bias and methodological quality of the included studies were assessed using Cochrane Risks of bias tool and PEDro scale respectively. The data was analyzed using both narrative and quantitative syntheses. In the quantitative synthesis, meta-analysis was carried out using random effect model analysis.
RESULTS: The results showed that, home-based neurostimulation is superior to the control at improving upper limb muscle strength (SMD = 0.72, 95% CI = 0.08 to 1.32, p = 0.03), functional mobility (SMD = -0.39, 95% CI = -0.65 to 0.14, p = 0.003) and walking endurance (SMD = 0.33, 95% CI = 0.08 to 0.59, p = 0.01) post intervention; and upper limb motor function (SMD = 0.9, 95% CI = 0.10 to 1.70, p = 0.03), functional mobility (SMD = -0.30, 95% CI = -0.56 to -0.05, p = 0.02) and walking endurance (SMD = 0.33, 95% CI = 0.08 to 0.59, p = 0.01) at follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS: Home-based neurostimulation can be used to improve upper and lower limb function after stroke.
摘要：
背景：家庭康复是为患者提供服务的一种具有成本效益的手段。这项研究的目的是确定文献中有关家庭神经刺激对中风患者影响的证据。
方法：我们搜索了PubMED，Embase,WebofScience,Scopus,和CENTRAL使用诸如中风之类的关键词进行有关该主题的随机对照试验，电刺激和经颅直流电刺激。提取了有关参与者特征和感兴趣结果的平均得分的信息。分别采用Cochrane偏倚风险工具和PEDro量表对纳入研究的偏倚风险和方法学质量进行评估。数据采用叙述性和定量综合分析。在定量合成中,Meta分析采用随机效应模型分析。
结果：结果表明，基于家庭的神经刺激在改善上肢肌肉力量方面优于对照（SMD=0.72，95％CI=0.08至1.32，p=0.03），干预后的功能活动度（SMD=-0.39，95％CI=-0.65至0.14，p=0.003）和步行耐力（SMD=0.33，95％CI=0.08至0.59，p=0.01）；上肢运动功能（SMD=0.9，95％CI=0.10至1.70，p=0.03），随访时的功能活动度（SMD=-0.30，95％CI=-0.56至-0.05，p=0.02）和步行耐力（SMD=0.33，95％CI=0.08至0.59，p=0.01）。
结论：基于家庭的神经刺激可用于改善中风后的上肢和下肢功能。
方法：我们搜索了PubMED，Embase,WebofScience,Scopus,和CENTRAL使用诸如中风之类的关键词进行有关该主题的随机对照试验，电刺激和经颅直流电刺激。提取了有关参与者特征和感兴趣结果的平均得分的信息。分别采用Cochrane偏倚风险工具和PEDro量表对纳入研究的偏倚风险和方法学质量进行评估。数据采用叙述性和定量综合分析。在定量合成中,Meta分析采用随机效应模型分析。
结果：结果表明，基于家庭的神经刺激在改善上肢肌肉力量方面优于对照（SMD=0.72，95％CI=0.08至1.32，p=0.03），干预后的功能活动度（SMD=-0.39，95％CI=-0.65至0.14，p=0.003）和步行耐力（SMD=0.33，95％CI=0.08至0.59，p=0.01）；上肢运动功能（SMD=0.9，95％CI=0.10至1.70，p=0.03），随访时的功能活动度（SMD=-0.30，95％CI=-0.56至-0.05，p=0.02）和步行耐力（SMD=0.33，95％CI=0.08至0.59，p=0.01）。
结论：基于家庭的神经刺激可用于改善中风后的上肢和下肢功能。
