This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 38/6/1999    most recent STROKEAHA.107.482687v1 Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Woodford, H. J. Articles by Price, C. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Woodford, H. J. Articles by Price, C. Related Collections Acute Stroke Syndromes Other Stroke Treatment - Medical

(Stroke. 2007;38:1999.)
© 2007 American Heart Association, Inc.

Cochrane Corner

Electromyographic Biofeedback for the Recovery of Motor Function After Stroke

From the Cumberland Infirmary (H.J.W.), Cumbria, UK; and the Northumbria Healthcare Trust (C.P.), Northumberland, UK.

Correspondence to Henry J. Woodford, Cumberland Infirmary, Newtown Rd, Carlisle, Cumbria, UK CA2 7HY. E-mail henry.woodford@ncumbria-acute.nhs.uk

Graeme J. Hankey MD, FRCP Section Editor:

Key Words: biofeedback • EMG • physiotherapy • rehabilitation • stroke • stroke recovery

An extract of the first 250 words of the full text is provided, because this article has no abstract.

	Introduction

 
The specific objective of this review was to determine the efficacy of any form of electromyographic biofeedback (EMG-BFB) used after a stroke in order to aid motor function recovery.

	Search Strategy

 
We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched March 30, 2006), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; The Cochrane Library Issue 4, 2005), MEDLINE (1966 to November 2005), EMBASE (1980 to November 2005), CINAHL (1983 to November 2005), PsycINFO (1974 to November 2005) and First Search (1966 to November 2005). We scanned reference lists for relevant articles and contacted equipment manufacturers and distributors

	Selection Criteria

 
Randomized and quasirandomized studies comparing EMG-BFB with control for motor function recovery in stroke patients.

	Data Collection & Analysis

 
Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Where possible we contacted study authors for further information. Any reported adverse effects were noted.

	Main Results

 
Thirteen trials involving 269 people were included. All trials compared EMG-BFB plus standard physiotherapy to standard physiotherapy either alone or with sham EMG-BFB. Only 1 study used a motor strength assessment scale for evaluation of patients, which indicated benefit from EMG-BFB (weighted mean difference 1.09; 95% CI, 0.48 to 1.70). EMG-BFB did not have a significant benefit in improving range of motion through the ankle (standardized mean difference 0.05; 95% CI, –0.36 to 0.46), knee or wrist joints. However, 1 trial suggested a benefit in range of motion at the shoulder (standardized mean difference 0.88; 95% CI, 0.07 to 1.70). Change in stride length or gait speed was not improved by EMG-BFB. Two studies . . . [Full Text of this Article]