No abstract

This systematic review with a meta-analysis of studies was carried out to evaluate the effectiveness of robotic training (RT) and conventional training (CT) in improving the motor recovery of paretic upper limbs in stroke patients. Numerous electronic databases were searched from January 2000 to May 2016. Finally, 13 randomized-controlled trials fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were included in the three meta-analyses. The first meta-analysis carried out for those studies using RT for stroke patients indicated a significant improvement in the RT groups. The second meta-analysis suggested that the upper limb function (measured by Fugl-Meyer test) was significantly improved when RT was used with CT compared with CT alone. The third meta-analysis noted a significant difference in motor recovery between the CT-only and RT groups (RT only or RT combined with CT) in the chronic stages of stroke, but not in the acute or subacute stages. However, the RT group also showed a higher Fugl-Meyer score in patients at both the acute and the subacute stage. RT appeared to have positive outcomes to enhance motor recovery of the paralyzed upper limb. Robotic devices were believed to provide more assistance to patients to help support the weight of the upper limb; thus, active movement training can begin in the early rehabilitation stage. These novel devices may also help those chronic patients to achieve better rehabilitation goals. As a summary, RT could be used in addition to CT to help both therapists and patients in the management of the paralyzed upper limb.

No abstract

Background/Objective: To evaluate the functional outcomes of moderate to severe burn patients with and without rehabilitation in terms of self-care performance and quality of life (QOL). Methods: Fifty-five patients with total burn surface area of 30% or more were divided into two groups: rehabilitation and conventional care groups. The rehabilitation group underwent comprehensive rehabilitation interventions (e.g., occupational therapy, physiotherapy, and patient and family education) in addition to standard clinical interventions received by the conventional care group. The outcomes included self-care performance (Modified Barthel Index [MBI]), QOL (World Health Organization Quality of Life-BREF), pain and itchiness (Visual Analogue Scale [VAS]), quality of sleep, and mental health (Self-Rating Depression Scale [SDS] and Self-Rating Anxiety Scale) measured before and 3 months after the intervention. Results: After the intervention, significant improvements were found in MBI, all dimensions of QOL, pain, and SDS in the rehabilitation group (all p < .05). In the conventional care group, significant improvements were found only in MBI (p < .001), the physical health dimension of QOL (p < .01), and pain (p < .001). Group comparisons showed that the rehabilitation group Funding/support: This study was substantially supported by the