Background Stroke results in balance disorders and these directly affect autonomy and quality of life. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the efficacy of physical therapy (PT) on balance and postural control after stroke. Methods We included all randomized controlled trials assessing the efficacy of PT on balance and postural control in adult patients after stroke without language restriction. Medline, Embase/Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PEDro, Pascal, and Francis databases were searched until January 2019. Primary outcomes were balance (Berg Balance scale and Postural Assessment Scale for Stroke) and postural control with postural deviation or stability measurement in sitting or standing static evaluation. A pair of independent reviewers selected studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Meta-analyses with subgroups (categories of PT, time post-stroke, and lesion location) and meta-regression (duration of PT) were conducted. Results A total of 145 studies (n = 5912) were selected from the 13,123 records identified. For balance, evidence was found in favor of the efficacy of functional task-training alone (standardized mean difference 0.39, 95% confidence interval [0.09; 0.68], heterogeneity I 2 = 63%) or associated with musculoskeletal intervention and/or cardiopulmonary intervention (0.37, [0.19; 0.55], I 2 = 48%), electrostimulation (0.91, [0.49; 1.34], I 2 = 52%) immediately after intervention, compared to sham treatment or usual care (ST/UC). For postural deviation eyes open, assistive devices were more effective than no treatment (-0.21, [-0.37; -0.05], I 2 = 0%) immediately after intervention; for postural stability eyes open, functional task-training and sensory interventions were more effective than ST/UC (0.97, [0.35; 1.59], I 2 = 65% and 0.80, [0.46; 1.13], I 2 = 37% respectively) immediately after intervention. Conclusions Functional task-training associated with musculoskeletal intervention and/or cardiopulmonary intervention and sensory interventions seem to be immediately effective in improving balance and postural stability, respectively. The heterogeneity of PT and the weak methodological quality of studies limited the interpretation and the confidence in findings.

IntroductionStroke frequently results in balance disorders, leading to lower levels of activity and a diminution in autonomy. Current physical therapies (PT) aiming to reduce postural imbalance have shown a large variety of effects with low levels of evidence. The objectives are to determine the efficiency of PT in recovering from postural imbalance in patients after a stroke and to assess which PT is more effective.Methods and analysisWe will search several databases from inception to October 2015. Only randomised controlled trials assessing PT to recover from poststroke postural imbalance in adults will be considered.Outcome measures will be the Berg Balance Scale (BBS), the Postural Assessment Scale for Stroke (PASS), the ‘weight-bearing asymmetry’ (WBA), the ‘centre of pressure’ (COP) and the ‘limit of stability’ (LOS). WBA, COP and LOS are measured by a (sitting or standing) static evaluation on force plate or another device.Two independent reviewers will screen titles, abstracts and full-text articles, evaluate the risk of bias and will perform data extraction. In addition to the outcomes, measures of independence will be analysed. This study will aim at determining the effects of PT on the function (WBA, COP, LOS), the activity (BBS, PASS) and the independence of patients. Subgroup analyses will be planned according to the location of brain lesion (hemispheric, brainstem or cerebellum), the time since stroke (early, late, chronic), the PT (type, main aim (direct effect or generalisation), overall duration), the type of approaches (top-down or bottom-up) and the methodological quality of studies.Ethics and disseminationNo ethical statement will be required. The results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. This meta-analysis aims at managing the rehabilitation after postural imbalance by PT after a stroke.Trial registration numberProspero CRD42016037966;Pre-results.

PA involves persistent reduction in postural asymmetry in RBD patients without neglect. These findings were obtained at a chronic stage. This new effect cannot be explained by reduction in spatial attentional shift. Improvement may be explained by a better calibration of extra personal space frames used for posture, without effect on personal space frame. Findings argue in favour of a bottom-up effect of PA on mechanisms underlying spatial cognition.

BackgroundFindings regarding the impact of language bias on treatment effect estimates (TEE) are conflicting, and very few studies have assessed these impacts in rehabilitation. The purpose was to compare TEE between studies published in non-English language (SPNEL) and those published in English language (SPEL) included in a previously published meta-analysis assessing the effects of physical therapy on balance and postural control after stroke. MethodsSix databases were searched until January 2019. Two independent reviewers selected randomised trials, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We conducted subgroup metaanalyses according to the language of study publication, then compared TEE between SPEL and SPNEL subgroups by using a random-effects meta-regression model. ResultsFrom 13,123 records, 132 SPEL (n = 5219) and 13 SPNEL (n = 693) were included. SPNEL had a weight in the pooled estimate (8.2%) significantly lower than SPEL (91.8%; p<0.001). Compared to SPEL, SPNEL had both significantly worse methodological quality (p = 0.002) and quality of reporting for blinding of outcome assessment (p<0.001); and a significantly worse quality of reporting for incomplete outcome data (p<0.001). SPNEL had a significantly worse precision (i.e. inverse of variance) of TEE than SPEL (p = 0.005). Overall, the TEE was not significantly different between SPNEL and SPEL (standardised mean difference PLOS ONE PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0229822 March 9, 2020 1 / 15 OPEN ACCESS Citation: Hugues A, Di Marco J, Bonan I, Rode G, Cucherat M, Gueyffier F (2020) Publication language and the estimate of treatment effects of physical therapy on balance and postural control after stroke in meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials. PLoS ONE 15(3): e0229822. ConclusionsSPNEL had a worse methodological quality than SPEL and were likely to over-estimate treatment effect. If inclusion of SPNEL in a systematic review is considered to be relevant, the impact of such studies on TEE should be explored by sensitivity analyses to ensure the findings validity. Fig 3. Comparison of treatment effect estimates between SPEL and SPNEL. SE, standard error; SMD, standardised mean difference; SPEL, studies published in English language; SPNEL, studies published in non-English language.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract