Feasibility, Acceptability, and Efficacy of Mindfulness Training in People With Upper Motor Neuron Disorders: A Systematic Review

Korupolu, Radha; Malik, Aila; Ratcliff, Chelsea G.; Robinson‐Whelen, Susan; Taylor, Heather B.

doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2022.05.020

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 101 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We summarized the results in tables based on a previously used method by our research team in a recent systematic review. The characters “+S” or “0” were used to indicate whether a particular outcome measure achieved statistical significance, with “+S” in favor of VNS therapy, or “0” if there was no difference between active VNS and control groups ( 42 ). We did not perform a meta-analysis due to high variability in the methods used for VNS, and our team considered it would not provide an accurate effect size ( 43 ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…VNS experts expressed similar concerns about the inappropriateness of combining results from various stimulation methods, published in a commentary ( 41 ). Hence, we calculated the relative change in outcome measures to assess the efficacy of VNS therapy on the most widely used upper extremity motor outcome measure, the upper extremity Fugl-Meyer-Assessment (FMA-UE), separately for non-invasive and invasive studies utilizing methods in two recently published systematic review papers ( 42 , 44 ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Neurorehabilitation with vagus nerve stimulation: a systematic review

Korupolu,

Miller,

Park

et al. 2024

Front. Neurol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo systematically review vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) studies to present data on the safety and efficacy on motor recovery following stroke, traumatic brain injury (TBI), and spinal cord injury (SCI).MethodsData sources: PubMed, EMBASE, SCOPUS, and Cochrane.Study selectionClinical trials of VNS in animal models and humans with TBI and SCI were included to evaluate the effects of pairing VNS with rehabilitation therapy on motor recovery.Data extractionTwo reviewers independently assessed articles according to the evaluation criteria and extracted relevant data electronically.Data synthesisTwenty-nine studies were included; 11 were animal models of stroke, TBI, and SCI, and eight involved humans with stroke. While there was heterogeneity in methods of delivering VNS with respect to rehabilitation therapy in animal studies and human non-invasive studies, a similar methodology was used in all human-invasive VNS studies. In animal studies, pairing VNS with rehabilitation therapy consistently improved motor outcomes compared to controls. Except for one study, all human invasive and non-invasive studies with controls demonstrated a trend toward improvement in motor outcomes compared to sham controls post-intervention. However, compared to non-invasive, invasive VNS, studies reported severe adverse events such as vocal cord palsy, dysphagia, surgical site infection, and hoarseness of voice, which were found to be related to surgery.ConclusionOur review suggests that VNS (non-invasive or invasive) paired with rehabilitation can improve motor outcomes after stroke in humans. Hence, VNS human studies are needed in these populations (referring to SCI and TBI?) or just SCI. There are risks related to device implantation to deliver invasive VNS compared to non-invasive VNS. Future human comparison studies are required to study and quantify the efficacy vs. risks of paired VNS delivered via different methods with rehabilitation, which would allow patients to make an informed decision.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=330653.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%