Combined somatosensory and motor training to improve upper limb function following stroke: a systematic scoping review

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this systematic scoping review was to (1) identify combined somatosensory and motor training interventions for the upper limb and their training components, and (2) review the efficacy of the combined interventions.

Methods: Participants were adults post-stroke with somatosensory and/or movement deficits in the upper limb. All studies with interventions combining somatosensory and motor training and targeting the affected upper limb were included. Outcome measures were assessments of somatosensory and/or motor impairment and upper limb function.

Results: Ten studies (n = 219) were included, comprising three randomized controlled trials, two pre-post studies with non-randomized comparison groups, three single-case experimental studies, and two case reports. There was heterogeneity across studies with regards to intervention contents and dosage, participant characteristics, and outcome measures. The interventions included combinations of tactile stimulation/discrimination, proprioceptive stimulation/discrimination, haptic object discrimination/recognition, movement training, and functional training. Only one group study, a non-randomized controlled study with multiple active components and the largest dose of treatment, found significant improvements in fine motor and somatosensory measures. Some improvements were found in case studies.

Conclusion: There was little consistency across ‘combined somatosensory and motor training’ interventions and few have been rigorously tested for efficacy across somatosensory, motor and functional outcomes.

Keywords:

• stroke
• somatosensory
• motor
• arm
• hand
• upper limb
• rehabilitation

UG is a PhD candidate at the University of Newcastle supported by a University of Newcastle Postgraduate Research Scholarship and by a NHMRC Centre of Research Excellence in Stroke Rehabilitation and Brain Injury Travel grant. The authors were supported by the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) project grants 191214, 307902, 1022694 (LC); ARC Future Fellowship (FT100100439) (LC); the James S. McDonnell Foundation 21st Century Science Initiative in Cognitive Rehabilitation Collaborative Award (# 220020413) (LC and MN); NHMRC Centre of Research Excellence in Stroke Rehabilitation and Brain Injury (#1077898) (MN, LC, and PvV); NHMRC partnership grant 1134495 (LC and MN); Brawn Bequest, University of Newcastle (MN).

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors

Additional information

Funding

UG is a PhD candidate at the University of Newcastle supported by a University of Newcastle Postgraduate Research Scholarship and by a NHMRC Centre of Research Excellence in Stroke Rehabilitation and Brain Injury Travel grant. The authors were supported by the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) project grants 191214, 307902, 1022694 (LC); ARC Future Fellowship (FT100100439) (LC); the James S. McDonnell Foundation 21st Century Science Initiative in Cognitive Rehabilitation Collaborative Award (# 220020413) (LC and MN); NHMRC Centre of Research Excellence in Stroke Rehabilitation and Brain Injury (#1077898) (MN, LC, and PvV); NHMRC partnership grant 1134495 (LC and MN); Brawn Bequest, University of Newcastle (MN)