Efficacy of modern rehabilitation methods after stroke

This review aims to systematize modern rehabilitation methods after a stroke to identify the most effective approaches based on an analysis of scientific literature. The analysis covers clinical studies and reviews dedicated to various rehabilitation methods, including physiotherapy, functional electrical myostimulation, kinesiotherapy, pharmacological approaches, cognitive therapy, as well as the use of cutting-edge technologies such as virtual reality and robotic systems. Aspects of psychological support and social adaptation are also explored. The review shows that the comprehensive use of various rehabilitation methods, including physical exercises, cognitive stimulation, and the application of new technologies, leads to significant improvement in functional recovery in stroke patients. The application of functional electrical myostimulation, kinesiotherapy, and ultrasound therapy demonstrates particularly promising results in improving motor skills and reducing spasticity. Cognitive rehabilitation contributes to significant improvements in memory and executive functions, while innovative technologies allow for focused and personalized approaches for each patient. The study confirms that integrating multidisciplinary approaches into the rehabilitation program after a stroke significantly enhances patients’ chances of recovery and returns them to a more fulfilling life. Future research should focus on deepening the understanding of the interaction between various methods and technologies, as well as assessing their long-term impact on patients’ quality of life.

1. Ikromov Sh.B., Ergashe va F.N. Modern approaches to rehabilitation of patients after stroke. Research Focus. 2022;1(1):169–180. (In Russian)].

2. Our World in Data. Deaths from stroke by age, World, 1990 to 2019. [Electronic resource]. URL: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/stroke-deaths-by-age (date of access 29.09.2023).

3. Pacheco-Barrios K., Giannoni-Luza S., Navarro-Flores A. et al. Burden of Stroke and Population-Attributable Fractions of Risk Factors in Latin America and the Caribbean. Journal of the American Heart Association. 2022;11(21):e027044. DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.122.027044

4. Demyanovskaya E.G., Vasiliev A.S. Clinical and pathophysiologic bases and advanced developments in rehabilitation of patients after ischemic stroke. Lechashchij Vrach. 2021;5(24):17–20. (In Russian)].

5. Akzhigitov, R.G., Alekyan B.G., Alferova V.V. et al. (2021). Ischemic stroke and transient ischemic attack in adults. Clinical guidelines. Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation. (In Russian)].

6. Lapteva E.S., Tsutsunava M.R., Dyachkova-Gertseva D.S. Rehabilitation of patients after stroke. Medicinskij alfavit. 2020;4(39):35–39. (In Russian)].

7. Doumas I., Everard G., Dehem S. et al. Serious games for upper limb rehabilitation after stroke: a meta-analysis. J. NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation. 2021;18(1):100. DOI: 10.1186/s12984-021-00889-1

8. Quandt F., Hummel F.C. The infl uence of functional electrical stimulation on hand motor recovery in stroke patients: a review. Experimental and Translational Stroke Medicine. 2014;6:1–7. DOI: 10.1186/2040-7378-6-1

9. Aprile I., Germanotta M., Cruciani A. et al. Upper limb robotic rehabilitation after stroke: a multicenter, randomized clinical trial. J. NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation. 2020;44(1):3–14. DOI: 10.1097/NPT.0000000000000295

10. Tieri G., Morone G., Paolucci S. et al. The use of augmented reality for rehabilitation after stroke: a narrative review. J. NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation. 2020;17(1):90. DOI: 10.1186/s12984-020-00722-3

11. Verheyden G., Nieuwboer A., De Wit L. et al. Gait rehabilitation after stroke: review of the evidence of predictors, clinical outcomes and timing for interventions. Acta Neurologica Belgica. 2020;120(3),783–791. DOI: 10.1007/s13760-020-01319-0

12. Hu X.L., Tong K.Y., Song R. et al. An Exoneuromusculoskeleton for self-help upper limb rehabilitation after stroke. IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering. 2020;28(12):2714–2723. DOI: 10.1109/TNSRE.2020.3035812

13. Biasiucci A., Leeb R., Iturrate I. et al. Brain-computer interface robotics for hand rehabilitation after stroke: a systematic review. J. NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation. 2019;16(1):145. DOI: 10.1186/s12984-019-0632-0

14. French B., Thomas L.H., Coupe J. et al. The eff ect of time spent in rehabilitation on activity limitation and impairment after stroke. Journal of Stroke and Cerebrovascular Diseases. 2021;30(4):105628. DOI: 10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2021.105628

15. Laver K.E., Adey-Wakeling Z., Crotty M. et al. Tele-Rehabilitation after Stroke: An Updated Systematic Review of the Literature. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare. 2018;24(7),469–478. DOI: 10.1177/1357633X18783902

16. Bernhardt J., Godecke E., Johnson L. et al. Early Rehabilitation After Stroke: A Narrative Review. Current Opinion in Neurology. 2017;30(6):720–726. DOI: 10.1097/WCO.0000000000000495

17. Zhang L., Xing G., Fan Y. et al. Research on promotion of lower limb movement function recovery after stroke by using lower limb rehabilitation robot in combination with constant velocity muscle strength training. IEEE International Symposium on Medical Information and Communication Technology. 2021;7:70–73. DOI: 10.1109/ISMII52409.2021.00022

18. Bavikatte G., Subramanian G., Ashford S. et al. Early identifi cation, intervention and management of post-stroke spasticity: expert consensus recommendations. J. Cent. Nerv. Syst. Dis. 2021;13:11795735211036576. DOI: 10.1177/11795735211036576. PMID: 34566442; PMCID: PMC8461119.

19. Hara T., Momosaki R., Niimi M. et al. Botulinum Toxin therapy combined with rehabilitation for stroke: a systematic review of eff ect on motor function. Toxins (Basel). 2019;11(12):707. DOI: 10.3390/toxins11120707. PMID: 31817426; PMCID: PMC6950173.

20. Elzib H., Pawloski J., Ding Y. et al. Antidepressant pharmacotherapy and poststroke motor rehabilitation: A review of neurophysiologic mechanisms and clinical relevance. Brain Circ. 2019;5(2):62–67. DOI: 10.4103/bc.bc_3_19. Epub 2019 Jun 27. PMID: 31334358; PMCID: PMC6611192.

21. Zhivolupov S.A., Samartsev I.N. Diffi culties and prospects of rational therapy of ischemic strokes. Medical Council. 2022;16(21):29–34. (In Russian)].

22. Agarwal A., Vishnu V.Y., Sharma J. et al. Citicoline in acute ische mic stroke: A randomized controlled trial. PLoS One. 2022;17(5):e0269224. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0269224. PMID: 35639720; PMCID: PMC9154187

23. Diener H.C., Ntaios G., O’Donnell M. et al. Non-vitamin-K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) for the prevention of secondary stroke. Expert Opin. Pharmacother. 2018;19(14):1597–1602. DOI: 10.1080/14656566.2018.1515913. Epub 2018 Sep 17. PMID: 30152249

24. Tarantino V., Burgio F., Toff ano R. et al. Effi cacy of a training on executive functions in potentiating rehabilitation eff ects in stroke patients. Brain Sci. 2021;11(8):1002. DOI: 10.3390/brainsci11081002. PMID: 34439621; PMCID: PMC8392264

25. Cicerone K.D., Goldin Y., Ganci K. et al. Evidence-based cognitive rehabilitation: systematic review of the literature from 2009 Through 2014. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 2019;100(8):1515–1533. DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2019.02.011. Epub 2019 Mar 26. PMID: 30926291

26. Sun R., Li X., Zhu Z. et al. Eff ects of combined cognitive and exercise interventions on poststroke cognitive function: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Biomed Res. Int. 2021;2021:4558279. DOI: 10.1155/2021/4558279. PMID: 34840972; PMCID: PMC8612794.

27. Zelensky M.M., Reva S.A., Shaderkina A.I. Virtual reality (VR) in clinical medicine: International and Russian experience. Journal of Telemedicine and E-health. 2021;7(3):7–20. (In Russian)].

28. Peng Q., Yin L., Cao Y. Eff ectiveness of virtual reality in the rehabilitation of motor function of patients with subacute stroke: a meta-analysis. Frontiers in Neurology. 2021;12:639535. DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2021.639535 PMCID: PMC8131676 PMID: 34025553

29. Calafi ore D., Negrini F., Tottoli N. et al. Effi cacy of robotic exoskeleton for gait rehabilitation in patients with subacute stroke: a systematic review. Eur. J. Phys. Rehabil. Med. 2022;58(1):1–8. DOI: 10.23736/S1973-9087.21.06846-5. Epub 2021 Jul 12. PMID: 34247470; PMCID: PMC9980569

30. Edwards D.J., Forrest G., Cortes M. et al. Walking improvement in chronic incomplete spinal cord injury with exoskeleton robotic training (WISE): a randomized controlled trial. Spinal Cord. 2022;60(6):522-532. DOI: 10.1038/s41393-022-00751-8. Epub 2022 Jan 29. PMID: 35094007; PMCID: PMC9209325

31. Boukhennoufa I., Zhai X., Utti V. et al. Wearable sensors and machine learning in post-stroke rehabilitation assessment: A systematic review. Biomedical Signal Processing and Control. 2022;71:103197. DOI: 10.1016/j.bspc.2022.103197

32. Kirkevold M., Kildal Bragstad L., Bronken B.A. et al. Promoting psychosocial well-being following stroke: study protocol for a randomized, controlled trial. BMC Psychol. 2018;6(1):12. DOI: 10.1186/s40359-018-0223-6. PMID: 29615136; PMCID: PMC5883408

33. Verrienti G., Raccagni C., Lombardozzi G. et al. Motivation as a measurable outcome in stroke rehabilitation: a systematic review of the literature. Int .J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 2023;20(5):4187. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph20054187. PMID: 36901206; PMCID: PMC10001639.

34. Choi S., Kim D. Eff ects of combining cognitive behavioral therapy with bilateral upper limb training in stroke patients: a randomized controlled trial. Occup. Ther. Int. 2022;2022:4688113. DOI: 10.1155/2022/4688113. PMID: 35912312; PMCID: PMC9282985.

35. Marshall J., Devane N., Talbot R. et al. A randomised trial of social support group intervention for people with aphasia: A Novel application of virtual reality. PLoS One. 2020;15(9):e0239715. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0239715. PMID: 32970784; PMCID: PMC7514104.

36. Sevostyanova Е. The Social and economic factors of the rehabilitation of a post-stroke patient. Economic and Social Development (Book of Proceedings), 51st International Scientifi c Conference on Economic and Social. 2020.