Cargando…
Technology-assisted assessment of spasticity: a systematic review
BACKGROUND: Spasticity is defined as “a motor disorder characterised by a velocity dependent increase in tonic stretch reflexes (muscle tone) with exaggerated tendon jerks”. It is a highly prevalent condition following stroke and other neurological conditions. Clinical assessment of spasticity relie...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9733065/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36494721 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12984-022-01115-2 |
_version_ | 1784846275482484736 |
---|---|
author | Guo, Xinliang Wallace, Rebecca Tan, Ying Oetomo, Denny Klaic, Marlena Crocher, Vincent |
author_facet | Guo, Xinliang Wallace, Rebecca Tan, Ying Oetomo, Denny Klaic, Marlena Crocher, Vincent |
author_sort | Guo, Xinliang |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Spasticity is defined as “a motor disorder characterised by a velocity dependent increase in tonic stretch reflexes (muscle tone) with exaggerated tendon jerks”. It is a highly prevalent condition following stroke and other neurological conditions. Clinical assessment of spasticity relies predominantly on manual, non-instrumented, clinical scales. Technology based solutions have been developed in the last decades to offer more specific, sensitive and accurate alternatives but no consensus exists on these different approaches. METHOD: A systematic review of literature of technology-based methods aiming at the assessment of spasticity was performed. The approaches taken in the studies were classified based on the method used as well as their outcome measures. The psychometric properties and usability of the methods and outcome measures reported were evaluated. RESULTS: 124 studies were included in the analysis. 78 different outcome measures were identified, among which seven were used in more than 10 different studies each. The different methods rely on a wide range of different equipment (from robotic systems to simple goniometers) affecting their cost and usability. Studies equivalently applied to the lower and upper limbs (48% and 52%, respectively). A majority of studies applied to a stroke population (N = 79). More than half the papers did not report thoroughly the psychometric properties of the measures. Analysis identified that only 54 studies used measures specific to spasticity. Repeatability and discriminant validity were found to be of good quality in respectively 25 and 42 studies but were most often not evaluated (N = 95 and N = 78). Clinical validity was commonly assessed only against clinical scales (N = 33). Sensitivity of the measure was assessed in only three studies. CONCLUSION: The development of a large diversity of assessment approaches appears to be done at the expense of their careful evaluation. Still, among the well validated approaches, the ones based on manual stretching and measuring a muscle activity reaction and the ones leveraging controlled stretches while isolating the stretch-reflex torque component appear as the two promising practical alternatives to clinical scales. These methods should be further evaluated, including on their sensitivity, to fully inform on their potential. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12984-022-01115-2. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9733065 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-97330652022-12-10 Technology-assisted assessment of spasticity: a systematic review Guo, Xinliang Wallace, Rebecca Tan, Ying Oetomo, Denny Klaic, Marlena Crocher, Vincent J Neuroeng Rehabil Review BACKGROUND: Spasticity is defined as “a motor disorder characterised by a velocity dependent increase in tonic stretch reflexes (muscle tone) with exaggerated tendon jerks”. It is a highly prevalent condition following stroke and other neurological conditions. Clinical assessment of spasticity relies predominantly on manual, non-instrumented, clinical scales. Technology based solutions have been developed in the last decades to offer more specific, sensitive and accurate alternatives but no consensus exists on these different approaches. METHOD: A systematic review of literature of technology-based methods aiming at the assessment of spasticity was performed. The approaches taken in the studies were classified based on the method used as well as their outcome measures. The psychometric properties and usability of the methods and outcome measures reported were evaluated. RESULTS: 124 studies were included in the analysis. 78 different outcome measures were identified, among which seven were used in more than 10 different studies each. The different methods rely on a wide range of different equipment (from robotic systems to simple goniometers) affecting their cost and usability. Studies equivalently applied to the lower and upper limbs (48% and 52%, respectively). A majority of studies applied to a stroke population (N = 79). More than half the papers did not report thoroughly the psychometric properties of the measures. Analysis identified that only 54 studies used measures specific to spasticity. Repeatability and discriminant validity were found to be of good quality in respectively 25 and 42 studies but were most often not evaluated (N = 95 and N = 78). Clinical validity was commonly assessed only against clinical scales (N = 33). Sensitivity of the measure was assessed in only three studies. CONCLUSION: The development of a large diversity of assessment approaches appears to be done at the expense of their careful evaluation. Still, among the well validated approaches, the ones based on manual stretching and measuring a muscle activity reaction and the ones leveraging controlled stretches while isolating the stretch-reflex torque component appear as the two promising practical alternatives to clinical scales. These methods should be further evaluated, including on their sensitivity, to fully inform on their potential. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12984-022-01115-2. BioMed Central 2022-12-09 /pmc/articles/PMC9733065/ /pubmed/36494721 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12984-022-01115-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Review Guo, Xinliang Wallace, Rebecca Tan, Ying Oetomo, Denny Klaic, Marlena Crocher, Vincent Technology-assisted assessment of spasticity: a systematic review |
title | Technology-assisted assessment of spasticity: a systematic review |
title_full | Technology-assisted assessment of spasticity: a systematic review |
title_fullStr | Technology-assisted assessment of spasticity: a systematic review |
title_full_unstemmed | Technology-assisted assessment of spasticity: a systematic review |
title_short | Technology-assisted assessment of spasticity: a systematic review |
title_sort | technology-assisted assessment of spasticity: a systematic review |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9733065/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36494721 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12984-022-01115-2 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT guoxinliang technologyassistedassessmentofspasticityasystematicreview AT wallacerebecca technologyassistedassessmentofspasticityasystematicreview AT tanying technologyassistedassessmentofspasticityasystematicreview AT oetomodenny technologyassistedassessmentofspasticityasystematicreview AT klaicmarlena technologyassistedassessmentofspasticityasystematicreview AT crochervincent technologyassistedassessmentofspasticityasystematicreview |