Brain–Computer Interface Training Based on Brain Activity Can Induce Motor Recovery in Patients With Stroke: A Meta-Analysis

Where did this irrational belief come from that writing in a journal will induce doctors and hospitals to create and bring in such therapy? Haven't you heard of resistance to change? Keep the status quo even though it is a complete failure at getting survivors recovered?

Brain–Computer Interface Training Based on Brain Activity Can Induce Motor Recovery in Patients With Stroke: A Meta-Analysis

Show all authors

Ippei Nojima, PT, PhD, Hisato Sugata, PT, PhD, Hiroki Takeuchi, MD, PhD, ...

First Published December 27, 2021 Review Article Find in PubMed 

https://doi.org/10.1177/15459683211062895

Article information

Abstract

Background

Brain–computer interface (BCI) is a procedure involving brain activity in which neural status is provided to the participants for self-regulation. The current review aims to evaluate the effect sizes of clinical studies investigating the use of BCI-based rehabilitation interventions in restoring upper extremity function and effective methods to detect brain activity for motor recovery.

Methods

A computerized search of MEDLINE, CENTRAL, Web of Science, and PEDro was performed to identify relevant articles. We selected clinical trials that used BCI-based training for post-stroke patients and provided motor assessment scores before and after the intervention. The pooled standardized mean differences of BCI-based training were calculated using the random-effects model.

Results

We initially identified 655 potentially relevant articles; finally, 16 articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria, involving 382 participants. A significant effect of neurofeedback intervention for the paretic upper limb was observed (standardized mean difference = .48, [.16-.80], P = .006). However, the effect estimates were moderately heterogeneous among the studies (I² = 45%, P = .03). Subgroup analysis of the method of measurement of brain activity indicated the effectiveness of the algorithm focusing on sensorimotor rhythm.

Conclusion

This meta-analysis suggested that BCI-based training was superior to conventional interventions for motor recovery of the upper limbs in patients with stroke. However, the results are not conclusive because of a high risk of bias and a large degree of heterogeneity due to the differences in the BCI interventions and the participants; therefore, further studies involving larger cohorts are required to confirm these results.

Keywords

Brain–computer interface, stroke, brain activity, motor function

Access Options