How does cross-education affects muscles of paretic upper extremity in subacute stroke survivors?

Yurdakul, Ozan Volkan; Kilicoglu, Mehmet Serkan; Rezvanı, Aylin; Küçükakkaş, Okan; Eren, Fatih; Aydın, Teoman

doi:10.1007/s10072-020-04506-2

Cited by 6 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thirty (30/83, 36.1%) studies claimed that they utilised a randomised, controlled design; and among them six studies investigated on patients [ 68 , 74 , 75 , 93 , 99 , 121 ], whilst only one study claimed to be in the context of cross-education [ 99 ]. There were 12 (14.5%) studies utilised non-randomised or case-matched controls, with eight were on patients [ 56 , 80 , 83 , 88 , 94 , 111 , 112 , 115 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Among the 83 studies, 31 (37.3%) claimed that their aim was to examine the cross-education effects, with 10 studies examining acute effects of unilateral stimulation and 21 studies investigating the chronic effects of repeated unilateral stimulation. The aims, major findings, strength of the research design, and limitations as stated by the authors are summarised in Table 4 [ 12 , 19 – 21 , 23 – 25 , 41 , 52 , 54 , 57 , 62 , 64 , 69 – 71 , 77 , 80 , 91 , 96 , 97 , 99 , 100 , 103 , 105 , 107 – 110 , 113 , 114 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, considering the potential clinical implications of the contralateral effect caused by unilateral intervention as repeatedly suggested in the literature, it would be necessary to evaluate the efficacy of unilateral interventions on the less affected limb in the treatment or rehabilitation of the more affected side. However, most (21/25) of the studies on patients included in this review applied the stimulation on the more affected limb, whilst only one study that applied chronic ES on the nonparetic limb in patients with subacute stroke [ 99 ] to investigate cross-education effect. Therefore, further studies are needed to determine the efficacy of unilateral interventions on the less affected side, with cross-education being used as the theoretical framework in specific and clinical populations.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Over one-half of the 83 studies (48, 57.8%) assessed the effect on the homologous muscles contralateral to the stimulated side. In contrast, most of the remaining studies (31, 37.3%) examined the CNS responses ( Table 3 ), and a small number of studies also assessed the responses in clinical functional assessments [ 68 , 93 , 99 ], spasticity [ 59 ], sympathetic nervous system function [ 61 ] or cutaneous thermal regulation [ 97 ]. Among the 31 studies that claimed to investigate cross-education, 15 were on knee extensors, six on ankle dorsiflexors, six on forearm muscles, three on plantar flexors, and one on elbow flexors.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

A scoping review of the contralateral effects of unilateral peripheral stimulation on neuromuscular function

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is known that resistance exercise using one limb can affect motor function of both the exercised limb and the unexercised contralateral limb, a phenomenon termed cross-education. It has been suggested that cross-education has clinical implications, e.g. in rehabilitation for orthopaedic conditions or post-stroke paresis. Much of the research on the contralateral effect of unilateral intervention on motor output is based on voluntary exercise. This scoping review aimed to map the characteristics of current literature on the cross-education caused by three most frequently utilised peripheral neuromuscular stimulation modalities in this context: electrical stimulation, mechanical vibration and percutaneous needling, that may direct future research and translate to clinical practice. A systematic search of relevant databases (Ebsco, ProQuest, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science) through to the end of 2020 was conducted following the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Review. Empirical studies on human participants that applied a unilateral peripheral neuromuscular stimulation and assessed neuromuscular function of the stimulated and/or the unstimulated side were selected. By reading the full text, the demographic characteristics, context, design, methods and major findings of the studies were synthesised. The results found that 83 studies were eligible for the review, with the majority (53) utilised electrical stimulation whilst those applied vibration (18) or needling (12) were emerging. Although the contralateral effects appeared to be robust, only 31 studies claimed to be in the context of cross-education, and 25 investigated on clinical patients. The underlying mechanism for the contralateral effects induced by unilateral peripheral stimulation remains unclear. The findings suggest a need to enhance the awareness of cross-education caused by peripheral stimulation, to help improve the translation of theoretical concepts to clinical practice, and aid in developing well-designed clinical trials to determine the efficacy of cross-education therapies.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A scoping review of the contralateral effects of unilateral peripheral stimulation on neuromuscular function

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Part A. Search strategies; Part B. Characteristics of the included studies; Part C. Inclusion criteria, exclusion criteria, details of neurostimulation, efficacy outcomes, safety outcomes and conclusions of included studies; Part D. Catalogue of included studies [ 27 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 , 70 , 71 , 72 , 73 , 74 , 75 , 76 , 77 , 78 , 79 , 80 , 81 , 82 , 83 , 84 , 85 , 86 , 87 , 88 , 89 , 90 ,…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficacy of Neurostimulations for Upper Extremity Function Recovery after Stroke: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Xue

Yan

Meng

et al. 2022

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Neurostimulations for the post-stroke recovery of upper extremity function has been explored in previous research, but there remains a controversy about the superiority of different neurostimulations. Methods: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were searched in MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov, from 1 January 2000 to 1 June 2022. A conventional pair-wise meta-analysis with a random-effect model was used to evaluate direct evidence. Bayesian random effect models were used for network meta-analysis. The grading of the recommendations assessment, development and evaluation (GRADE) approach was applied to assess the clinical quality of the results. Results: A total of 88 RCTs, which enrolled 3491 participants, were included. For the Fugl-Meyer Assessment-Upper Extremity score change from the baseline to the longest follow-up, the following interventions showed a significant difference: VNS (MD = 4.12, 95%CrI: 0.54 to 7.80, moderate certainty), cNMES (MD = 3.98, 95%CrI: 1.05 to 6.92, low certainty), FES (MD = 7.83, 95%CrI: 4.42 to 11.32, very low certainty), drTMS (MD = 7.94, 95%CrI: 3.71 to 12.07, moderate certainty), LFrTMS (MD = 2.64, 95%CrI: 1.20 to 4.11, moderate certainty), HFrTMS (MD = 6.73, 95%CrI: 3.26 to 10.22, moderate certainty), and iTBS combined with LFrTMS (MD = 5.41, 95%CrI: 0.48 to 10.35, moderate certainty). Conclusions: The neurostimulations above the revealed significant efficacy for improving the upper limb function after stroke eased the suffering of the patient.

show abstract

Strength Training of the Nonhemiplegic Side Promotes Motor Function Recovery in Patients With Stroke: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Shao¹,

Wang²,

Gou³

et al. 2023

Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How does cross-education affects muscles of paretic upper extremity in subacute stroke survivors?

Cited by 6 publications

References 32 publications

A scoping review of the contralateral effects of unilateral peripheral stimulation on neuromuscular function

A scoping review of the contralateral effects of unilateral peripheral stimulation on neuromuscular function

Efficacy of Neurostimulations for Upper Extremity Function Recovery after Stroke: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Strength Training of the Nonhemiplegic Side Promotes Motor Function Recovery in Patients With Stroke: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About