People who receive electromechanical and robot-assisted arm training after stroke might improve their activities of daily living, arm function, and arm muscle strength. However, the results must be interpreted with caution although the quality of the evidence was high, because there were variations between the trials in: the intensity, duration, and amount of training; type of treatment; participant characteristics; and measurements used.

Analysis 7.1. Comparison 7 Sensitivity analysis: by trial methodology (all trials involving treadmill training), Outcome 1

Analysis 1.2. Comparison 1 Electromechanical-and robotic-assisted gait training plus physiotherapy versus physiotherapy (or usual care), Outcome 2 Recovery of independent walking at follow-up a er study end.

People who receive electromechanical and robot-assisted arm and hand training after stroke might improve their activities of daily living, arm and hand function, and arm and hand muscle strength. However, the results must be interpreted with caution because the quality of the evidence was low to very low, and there were variations between the trials in the intensity, duration, and amount of training; type of treatment; and participant characteristics.

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for improving activities of daily living, and physical and cognitive functioning, in people a er stroke.

No abstract

BackgroundTranscranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) is an emerging approach for improving capacity in activities of daily living (ADL) and upper limb function after stroke. However, it remains unclear what type of tDCS stimulation is most effective. Our aim was to give an overview of the evidence network regarding the efficacy and safety of tDCS and to estimate the effectiveness of the different stimulation types.MethodsWe performed a systematic review of randomised trials using network meta-analysis (NMA), searching the following databases until 5 July 2016: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED, Web of Science, and four other databases. We included studies with adult people with stroke. We compared any kind of active tDCS (anodal, cathodal, or dual, that is applying anodal and cathodal tDCS concurrently) regarding improvement of our primary outcome of ADL capacity, versus control, after stroke. PROSPERO ID: CRD42016042055.ResultsWe included 26 studies with 754 participants. Our NMA showed evidence of an effect of cathodal tDCS in improving our primary outcome, that of ADL capacity (standardized mean difference, SMD = 0.42; 95% CI 0.14 to 0.70). tDCS did not improve our secondary outcome, that of arm function, measured by the Fugl-Meyer upper extremity assessment (FM-UE). There was no difference in safety between tDCS and its control interventions, measured by the number of dropouts and adverse events.ConclusionComparing different forms of tDCS shows that cathodal tDCS is the most promising treatment option to improve ADL capacity in people with stroke.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12984-017-0301-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Analysis 7.1. Comparison 7 Sensitivity analysis: by trial methodology (all trials involving treadmill training), Outcome 1