Popular Boards
Tivano Antoni, Benedictus Benedictus, Stefanus Erdana Putra | Brain Disorders | (2025)
Key Takeaways
Sample Definition And Size
The meta-analysis included seven randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of AI-assisted stroke rehabilitation. Six of these studies involved post-stroke patients within 3 to 6 months after stroke onset.
Study Type
Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Conflicts Of Interest
No conflicts of interest were declared in the provided abstract.
Results Summary
The pooled standard mean differences (SMDs) were 0.16 for the Barthel Index and 0.60 for the Motricity Index. There were no statistically significant differences between AI-assisted and conventional stroke rehabilitation for either outcome. The trials demonstrated non-inferiority of AI-assisted rehabilitation compared to conventional methods.
Abstract
Introduction: Stroke is the primary contributor to disability worldwide, causing a high economic burden due to its morbidity. Due to the application of artificial intelligence (AI), stroke rehabilitation has been revolutionized, resulting in significant improvement. Implementing AI also enables home-based care, thus helping stroke patients who generally have ambulatory difficulties. Methods: This research was a systematic review from Pubmed, ScienceDirect, and ProQuest, including randomized controlled trials (RCT) published from 2009 to 2024. Meta-analysis included seven studies discussing the functional and motoric outcomes of AI-assisted stroke rehabilitation. Results: Six studies included post-stroke patients within 3 to 6 months after the stroke occurred. AI models used were varied, ranging from end-effector or exoskeleton robots to a combination of both and virtual reality (VR). Overall, the included studies had a low risk of bias. Standard mean differences (SMDs) of the Barthel Index and Motricity Index were 0.16 and 0.60. No significant difference between AI-assisted stroke rehabilitation and conventional stroke rehabilitation for both outcomes. Non-inferiority trials showed that the AI-assisted method was not inferior to the conventional method of stroke rehabilitation. Discussion: Considering its feasibility, personalization, and flexible rehabilitation program, AI-assisted was non-inferior to the conventional method. A comprehensive guideline is needed to facilitate its usage in clinical practice. Conclusion: AI-assisted stroke rehabilitation was not inferior to conventional stroke rehabilitation.
Referenced In
Mercedes C.
2 months ago
Created: Apr 5, 2026