Brain‐computer interfaces for post‐stroke motor rehabilitation: a meta‐analysis
Brain‐computer interfaces (
BCI
s) can provide sensory feedback of ongoing brain oscillations, enabling stroke survivors to modulate their sensorimotor rhythms purposefully. A number of recent clinical studies indicate that repeated use of such
BCI
s might trigger neurological recovery and hence improvement in motor function. Here, we provide a first meta‐analysis evaluating the clinical effectiveness of
BCI
‐based post‐stroke motor rehabilitation. Trials were identified using
MEDLINE
,
CENTRAL
,
PED
ro and by inspection of references in several review articles. We selected randomized controlled trials that used
BCI
s for post‐stroke motor rehabilitation and provided motor impairment scores before and after the intervention. A random‐effects inverse variance method was used to calculate the summary effect size. We initially identified 524 articles and, after removing duplicates, we screened titles and abstracts of 473 articles. We found 26 articles corresponding to
BCI
clinical trials, of these, there were nine studies that involved a total of 235 post‐stroke survivors that fulfilled the inclusion criterion (randomized controlled trials that examined motor performance as an outcome measure) for the meta‐analysis. Motor improvements, mostly quantified by the upper limb Fugl‐Meyer Assessment (
FMA
‐
UE
), exceeded the minimal clinically important difference (
MCID
=5.25) in six
BCI
studies, while such improvement was reached only in three control groups. Overall, the
BCI
training was associated with a standardized mean difference of 0.79 (95%
CI
: 0.37 to 1.20) in
FMA
‐
UE
compared to control conditions, which is in the range of medium to large summary effect size. In addition, several studies indicated
BCI
‐induced functional and structural neuroplasticity at a subclinical level. This suggests that
BCI
technology could be an effective intervention for post‐stroke upper limb rehabilitation. However, more studies with larger sample size are required to increase the reliability of these results.
No keywords indexed for this article. Browse by subject →
Showing 50 of 77 references
Dan Li, Ruoyu Li · 2025
Jiajun Liu, Yiwei Li · 2025
Denis Moskiewicz, Iwona Sarzyńska-Długosz · 2025
Zi Wang, Yimin Du · 2025
Parisa Gazerani · 2025
Wei Zhao, Xiaolu Jiang · 2024
Xintao Wang, Haixia Ji · 2024
Rishishankar E. Suresh, M S Zobaer · 2024
Xiaoke Chai, Tianqing Cao · 2024
Athanasios Vavoulis, Patrícia Figueiredo · 2023
Muhammed Enes Gunduz, Bilal Bucak · 2023
Xin Li, Lu Wang · 2022
N.S. Malan, S. Sharma · 2022
Ju-Chun Hsieh, Hussein Alawieh · 2022
Ziwen Yuan, Yu Peng · 2021
Bin Shi, Quan Wang · 2021
Xiaotong Gu, Zehong Cao · 2021
Zhongfei Bai, Kenneth N. K. Fong · 2020
Shiv Kumar Mudgal, Suresh K Sharma · 2020
- Published
- Mar 25, 2018
- Vol/Issue
- 5(5)
- Pages
- 651-663
- License
- View
You May Also Like
Shorena Janelidze, Henrik Zetterberg · 2016
410 citations
Sian Cousins, Diego Kaski · 2017
136 citations
Martin M. Reich, Frank Steigerwald · 2015
135 citations
Marc‐Olivier Deguise, Giovanni Baranello · 2019
116 citations
Jan Cimbalnik, Benjamin Brinkmann · 2018
107 citations