Neural Interface-Based Motor Neuroprosthesis in Poststroke Upper Limb Neurorehabilitation: An Individual Patient Data...

To determine the efficacy of neural interface-based neurorehabilitation, including brain-computer interface, through conventional and individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis and to assess clinical parameters associated with positive response to neural interface-based neurorehabilitation.

PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases up to February 2022 were reviewed.

Studies using neural interface-controlled physical effectors (functional electrical stimulation and/or powered exoskeletons) and reported Fugl-Meyer Assessment-upper-extremity (FMA-UE) scores were identified. This meta-analysis was prospectively registered on PROSPERO (#CRD42022312428). PRISMA guidelines were followed.

Changes in FMA-UE scores were pooled to estimate the mean effect size. Subgroup analyses were performed on clinical parameters and neural interface parameters with both study-level variables and IPD.

Forty-six studies containing 617 patients were included. Twenty-nine studies involving 214 patients reported IPD. FMA-UE scores increased by a mean of 5.23 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.85-6.61). Systems that used motor attempt resulted in greater FMA-UE gain than motor imagery, as did training lasting >4 vs ≤4 weeks. On IPD analysis, the mean time-to-improvement above minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was 12 weeks (95% CI: 7 to not reached). At 6 months, 58% improved above MCID (95% CI: 41%-70%). Patients with severe impairment (P=.042) and age >50 years (P=.0022) correlated with the failure to improve above the MCID on univariate log-rank tests. However, these factors were only borderline significant on multivariate Cox analysis (hazard ratio [HR] 0.15, P=.08 and HR 0.47, P=.06, respectively).

Neural interface-based motor rehabilitation resulted in significant, although modest, reductions in poststroke impairment and should be considered for wider applications in stroke neurorehabilitation.