The DOI matches its Crossref record; 53 of the 54 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Effects of Augmented Exercise Therapy Time After Stroke: A Meta-Analysis
Abstract
Background and Purpose— To present a systematic review of studies that addresses the effects of intensity of augmented exercise therapy time (AETT) on activities of daily living (ADL), walking, and dexterity in patients with stroke. Summary of Review— A database of articles published from 1966 to November 2003 was compiled from MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PEDro, DARE, and PiCarta using combinations of the following key words: stroke, cerebrovascular disorders, physical therapy, physiotherapy, occupational therapy, exercise therapy, rehabilitation, intensity, dose–response relationship, effectiveness, and randomized controlled trial. References presented in relevant publications were examined as well as abstracts in proceedings. Studies that satisfied the following selection criteria were included: (1) patients had a diagnosis of stroke; (2) effects of intensity of exercise training were investigated; and (3) design of the study was a randomized controlled trial (RCT). For each outcome measure, the estimated effect size (ES) and the summary effect size (SES) expressed in standard deviation units (SDU) were calculated for ADL, walking speed, and dexterity using fixed and random effect models. Correlation coefficients were calculated between observed individual effect sizes on ADL of each study, additional time spent on exercise training, and methodological quality. Cumulative meta-analyses (random effects model) adjusted for the difference in treatment intensity in each study was used for the trials evaluating the effects of AETT provided. Twenty of the 31 candidate studies, involving 2686 stroke patients, were included in the synthesis. The methodological quality ranged from 2 to 10 out of the maximum score of 14 points. The meta-analysis resulted in a small but statistically significant SES with regard to ADL measured at the end of the intervention phase. Further analysis showed a significant homogeneous SES for 17 studies that investigated effects of increased exercise intensity within the first 6 months after stroke. No significant SES was observed for the 3 studies conducted in the chronic phase. Cumulative meta-analysis strongly suggests that at least a 16-hour difference in treatment time between experimental and control groups provided in the first 6 months after stroke is needed to obtain significant differences in ADL. A significant SES supporting a higher intensity was also observed for instrumental ADL and walking speed, whereas no significant SES was found for dexterity. Conclusion— The results of the present research synthesis support the hypothesis that augmented exercise therapy has a small but favorable effect on ADL, particularly if therapy input is augmented at least 16 hours within the first 6 months after stroke. This meta-analysis also suggests that clinically relevant treatment effects may be achieved on instrumental ADL and gait speed.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Greater amounts of physical training poststroke is associated with improved outcomes (without harm) in a number of meta-analyses,5,6 and many guidelines recommend increasing training dose.”
From Prespecified dose-response analysis for A Very Early Rehabilitation Trial (AVERT) (2016) · cites this paper as [6]
In the citing paper
“In humans, a number of systematic reviews and meta-analyses suggest a dose-response relationship, with more intensive therapy resulting in improved functional outcome after stroke.5,6,15”
From Prespecified dose-response analysis for A Very Early Rehabilitation Trial (AVERT) (2016) · cites this paper as [6]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses
Higgins, J. P. T., Thompson, S. G., Deeks, J. J., & Altman, D. G. (2003) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557 · Cited by 63,139
Meta-analysis in clinical trials
DerSimonian, R., & Laird, N. (1986) · Controlled Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/0197-2456(86)90046-2 · Cited by 39,552
Wasserman, S. S., Hedges, L. V., & Olkin, I. (1988) · Journal of Educational Statistics · doi:10.2307/1164953 · Cited by 10,377
The Handbook of Research Synthesis.
Howel, D., Cooper, H., & Hedges, L. V. (1995) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2533295 · Cited by 3,657
Probability of Regaining Dexterity in the Flaccid Upper Limb
Kwakkel, G., Kollen, B. J., van der Grond, J., & Prevo, A. J. H. (2003) · Stroke · doi:10.1161/01.str.0000087172.16305.cd · Cited by 1,409
Self-citationKennedy, C. O. (1971) · British Homeopathic journal · doi:10.1016/s0007-0785(71)80027-3 · Cited by 976
Intensity of leg and arm training after primary middle-cerebral-artery stroke: a randomised trial
Kwakkel, G., WAGENAAR, R. C., Twisk, J. W. R., Lankhorst, G. J., & Koetsier, J. C. (1999) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(98)09477-x · Cited by 931
Self-citationDean, C. M., Richards, C. L., & Malouin, F. (2000) · Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation · doi:10.1053/mr.2000.3839 · Cited by 666
Self-citationEffects of Intensity of Rehabilitation After Stroke
Kwakkel, G., WAGENAAR, R. C., Koelman, T. W., Lankhorst, G. J., & Koetsier, J. C. (1997) · Stroke · doi:10.1161/01.str.28.8.1550 · Cited by 588
Self-citation
Research works printed but not linked: 8
- 10.1161/str.32.1.268 · DOI
- 10.1161/str.28.8.1550 · DOI
- 10.1161/str.30.3.573 · DOI
- 10.1161/str.29.4.785 · DOI
- 10.1161/str.20.10.2799873 · DOI
- Hedges L Olkin I. Statistical Methods for Meta-analysis. Orlanda Fla: Academic Press; 1985.
- Raudenbush S. Random effects model. In: Cooper H Hedges LV eds. The Handbook of Research Synthesis. New York: Russell Sage Foundation; 1994: 301–323.
- 10.1161/str.16.6.3911506 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Langhorne, P., Bernhardt, J., & Kwakkel, G. (2011) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(11)60325-5 · Cited by 2,726
Self-citationGuidelines for Management of Ischaemic Stroke and Transient Ischaemic Attack 2008
The European Stroke Organisation (ESO) Executive Committee and the ESO Writing Committee (2008) · Cerebrovascular Diseases · doi:10.1159/000131083 · Cited by 2,504
Motor recovery after stroke: a systematic review
Langhorne, P., Coupar, F., & Pollock, A. (2009) · The Lancet Neurology · doi:10.1016/s1474-4422(09)70150-4 · Cited by 2,343
Self-citationWhat Is the Evidence for Physical Therapy Poststroke? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Veerbeek, J. M., van Wegen, E., van Peppen, R., van der Wees, P. J., Hendriks, E., Rietberg, M., & Kwakkel, G. (2014) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0087987 · Cited by 1,203
Self-citationVirtual reality for stroke rehabilitation
Laver, K., George, S., Thomas, S., Deutsch, J. E., & Crotty, M. (2015) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd008349.pub3 · Cited by 1,162
Metadata
- Authors
- Kwakkel, G., van Peppen, R., Wagenaar, R. C., Wood Dauphinee, S., Richards, C., Ashburn, A., Miller, K., Lincoln, N., Partridge, C., Wellwood, I., & Langhorne, P.
- Affiliations
- Boston University (US)
- From the Department of Physical Therapy and Research Institute for Fundamental and Clinical Human Movement Sciences (G.K., R.v.P.), VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; the Center of Excellence for Rehabilitation Medicine “De Hoogstraat” (G.K.), Rudolf Magnus Institute of Neuroscience, University Medical Centre Utrecht, the Netherlands; the Department of Rehabilitation Sciences and Center for Neurorehabilitation (R.C.W.), Sargent College of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences,...
- ORCID
- Venue
- Stroke
- Published
- 2004-11
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 2529-2539
- ISSN
- 0039-2499 (ISSN-L)
- 1524-4628
- OpenAlex
- W2141635852
- Cited by
- 1,081
- References
- 54
- Citations by year
- 2026: 30 · 2025: 39 · 2024: 30 · 2023: 32 · 2022: 53 · 2021: 59 · 2020: 52 · 2019: 56 · 2018: 57 · 2017: 47 · 2016: 56 · 2015: 73 · 2014: 70 · 2013: 51 · 2012: 55
- FWCI
- 4.83
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Stroke (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Amsterdam UMC (VU Amsterdam) - Institutional Repository (publishedVersion)
- ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) (acceptedVersion)
- ePrints Soton (University of Southampton) (submittedVersion)
- Kent Academic Repository (University of Kent) (submittedVersion)
- Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- ZonMw
- Koninklijk Nederlands Genootschap voor Fysiotherapie
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Clinical Neurology › Acute Ischemic Stroke Management
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Medical Practices and Rehabilitation
- Keywords
- stroke rehabilitation, exercise therapy, treatment intensity, dose-response relationship, activities of daily living, walking speed, dexterity, instrumental activities of daily living, early rehabilitation, chronic stroke, treatment duration, walking training, upper limb training, gait training, balance training, stroke mortality, stroke recurrence, stroke complications, stroke risk factors
- MeSH terms
- Stroke Rehabilitation, Activities of Daily Living, Exercise Therapy, Humans
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review