Psychometric properties of the sit-to-stand test for patients with pulmonary hypertension: A systematic review protocol.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary hypertension (PH) is a complex syndrome characterized by increased pulmonary arterial pressure and classified into five groups, according to dyspnea on exertion and systemic muscle dysfunction. These symptoms can be identified using the sit-to-stand test (STS), which indirectly evaluates exercise tolerance and lower limb muscle strength. Previous studies used the STS in PH; however, psychometric properties to understand and validate this test were not described for patients with PH. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the psychometric properties (validity, reliability, and responsiveness) of different STS protocols in patients with PH. METHODS AND ANALYSES: This is a systematic review protocol that will include studies using STS in patients with PH. Searches will be conducted on PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, SciELO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Web of Science databases following PICOT mnemonic strategy and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols (PRISMA-P). Rayyan software will be used for study selection. The Risk of bias will be assessed using the Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) tool, while the quality of evidence will be assessed using the modified Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). Two researchers will independently conduct the study, and a third researcher will be consulted in case of disagreement. The psychometric properties will be evaluated according to the COSMIN. This protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO, no. CRD42021244271). CONCLUSION: This systematic review will attempt to identify and show the available evidence on STS for different groups of PH and report validity, reliability, and responsiveness of different protocols.

Motor neuroprosthesis for promoting recovery of function after stroke.

BACKGROUND: Motor neuroprosthesis (MN) involves electrical stimulation of neural structures by miniaturized devices to allow the performance of tasks in the natural environment in which people live (home and community context), as an orthosis. In this way, daily use of these devices could act as an environmental facilitator for increasing the activities and participation of people with stroke. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of MN for improving independence in activities of daily living (ADL), activities involving limbs, participation scales of health-related quality of life (HRQoL), exercise capacity, balance, and adverse events in people after stroke. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (searched 19 August 2019), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (August 2019), MEDLINE (1946 to 16 August 2019), Embase (1980 to 19 August 2019), and five additional databases. We also searched trial registries, databases, and websites to identify additional relevant published, unpublished, and ongoing trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and randomized controlled cross-over trials comparing MN for improving activities and participation versus other assistive technology device or MN without electrical stimulus (stimulator is turned off), or no treatment, for people after stroke. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias of the included studies. Any disagreements were resolved through discussion with a third review author. We contacted trialists for additional information when necessary and performed all analyses using Review Manager 5. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS: We included four RCTs involving a total of 831 participants who were more than three months poststroke. All RCTs were of MN that applied electrical stimuli to the peroneal nerve. All studies included conditioning protocols to adapt participants to MN use, after which participants used MN from up to eight hours per day to all-day use for ambulation in daily activities performed in the home or community context. All studies compared the use of MN versus another assistive device (ankle-foot orthosis [AFO]). There was a high risk of bias for at least one assessed domain in three of the four included studies. No studies reported outcomes related to independence in ADL. There was low-certainty evidence that AFO was more beneficial than MN on activities involving limbs such as walking speed until six months of device use (mean difference (MD) -0.05 m/s, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.10 to -0.00; P = 0.03; 605 participants; 2 studies; I2 = 0%; low-certainty evidence); however, this difference was no longer present in our sensitivity analysis (MD -0.07 m/s, 95% CI -0.16 to 0.02; P = 0.13; 110 participants; 1 study; I2 = 0%). There was low to moderate certainty that MN was no more beneficial than AFO on activities involving limbs such as walking speed between 6 and 12 months of device use (MD 0.00 m/s, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.05; P = 0.93; 713 participants; 3 studies; I2 = 17%; low-certainty evidence), Timed Up and Go (MD 0.51 s, 95% CI -4.41 to 5.43; P = 0.84; 692 participants; 2 studies; I2 = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence), and modified Emory Functional Ambulation Profile (MD 14.77 s, 95% CI -12.52 to 42.06; P = 0.29; 605 participants; 2 studies; I2 = 0%; low-certainty evidence). There was no significant difference in walking speed when MN was delivered with surface or implantable electrodes (test for subgroup differences P = 0.09; I2 = 65.1%). For our secondary outcomes, there was very low to moderate certainty that MN was no more beneficial than another assistive device for participation scales of HRQoL (standardized mean difference 0.26, 95% CI -0.22 to 0.74; P = 0.28; 632 participants; 3 studies; I2 = 77%; very low-certainty evidence), exercise capacity (MD -9.03 m, 95% CI -26.87 to 8.81; P = 0.32; 692 participants; 2 studies; I2 = 0%; low-certainty evidence), and balance (MD -0.34, 95% CI -1.96 to 1.28; P = 0.68; 692 participants; 2 studies; I2 = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence). Although there was low- to moderate-certainty evidence that the use of MN did not increase the number of serious adverse events related to intervention (risk ratio (RR) 0.35, 95% CI 0.04 to 3.33; P = 0.36; 692 participants; 2 studies; I2 = 0%; low-certainty evidence) or number of falls (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.55; P = 0.08; 802 participants; 3 studies; I2 = 33%; moderate-certainty evidence), there was low-certainty evidence that the use of MN in people after stroke may increase the risk of participants dropping out during the intervention (RR 1.48, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.97; P = 0.007; 829 participants; 4 studies; I2 = 0%). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence indicates that MN is no more beneficial than another assistive technology device for improving activities involving limbs measured by Timed Up and Go, balance (moderate-certainty evidence), activities involving limbs measured by walking speed and modified Emory Functional Ambulation Profile, exercise capacity (low-certainty evidence), and participation scale of HRQoL (very low-certainty evidence). Evidence was insufficient to estimate the effect of MN on independence in ADL. In comparison to other assistive devices, MN does not appear to increase the number of falls (moderate-certainty evidence) or serious adverse events (low-certainty evidence), but may result in a higher number of dropouts during intervention period (low-certainty evidence).

Effects of treadmill inclination on the gait of individuals with chronic hemiparesis.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the effects of electric treadmill inclination on the gait of individuals with chronic hemiparesis. DESIGN: Descriptive, observational study. SETTING: Laboratory for human movement analyses of UFRN. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals (N=18) with a mean age of 55.3 ± 9.3 years and a lesion time of 36 ± 22.8 months. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Subjects were assessed for functional independence (FIM) and balance (Berg Balance Scale). Spatial-temporal variables were observed as well as the angular variation of the hip, knee, and ankle in the sagittal plane, while the individuals walked on the treadmill at 3 different inclinations (0%, 5%, and 10%). RESULTS: There was an increase in stance time between 0% and 5% (0.83 ± 0.21 vs 0.87 ± 0.20; P=.011) and 0% and 10% (0.83 ± 0.21 vs 0.88 ± 0.23; P=.021). The other spatial-temporal variables did not change. During initial contact there was an increase in the hip, knee, and ankle flexion angle. An increase in hip amplitude was also observed between 0% and 10% (37.83 ± 5.23 vs 41.12 ± 5.63; P<.001) and 5% and 10% (38.80 ± 5.96 vs 41.12 ± 5.63; P=.002) and in knee amplitude between 0% and 10% (47.51 ± 15.07 vs 50.30 ± 12.82; P=.040), as well as decreased hip extension and increased dorsiflexion. CONCLUSIONS: Treadmill inclination promoted angular alterations such as an increase in hip, knee, and ankle angle during initial contact and the swing phase and an increase in the amplitude of movement of the hip and knee, as well as an increase in stance time of the paretic lower limb.