Effects of physical therapies aiming directly or indirectly at the recovery of balance after stroke. A meta-analysis

Introduction/Background After stroke, standing balance is usually described as a predictor of functional recovery. Regarding literature, various type of physical therapy (PT) is used to improve balance. The aim of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the effects of PT directly focused on balance training (DFBT) and theses of PT indirectly focused on balance training (IFBT) on balance after stroke. Material and method Randomised controlled trials (RCT), without language restriction, until October 2015, assessing the Berg Balance Scale (BBS), the Postural Assessment Scale for Stroke, the posturographic parameters in static condition and measures of independence in activities of daily living were included. Two independent authors (AH and JDM) led this selection following the Cochrane recommendations (Hugues et al., 2017). Results One hundred and ninety-three parallel and crossover RCT from 9337 records were included, involving 8018 subjects [study sample: mean 41.5 (SD 49.7) subjects, age: pooled mean 61.7 (pooled SD 12.78) years]. A significant difference in favor of PT compared to no treatment was immediately found after the intervention for the BBS (DFBT: 7 studies, mean difference [MD] 1.38; 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.71; 2.05]. IFBT: 18 studies, MD 1.88; 95% CI [1.31; 2.45]). Only IFBT PT is more effective than sham treatment or usual care immediately after the intervention for the BBS (DFBT: 1 study, MD 5.33; 95% CI [−4.68; 15.34]. IFBT: 26 studies, MD 1.85; 95% CI [0.67; 3.03]). Conclusion These results show immediately after the intervention: –that balance can be improved by PT aiming directly or indirectly at the recovery of balance compared to no treatment; –an improvement of balance by PT indirectly focused on the recovery of balance compared to sham treatment or usual care.