Pediatric neurology · 2024
Three-Dimensional Upper Limb Movement Analysis in Children and Adolescents With Brachial Plexus Birth Injury: A Systematic Review.
Систематический обзорСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Le Roy Laura, van Bladel Anke, De Mits Sophie, Vanden Bossche Luc, Van der Looven Ruth
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: To synthesize the current evidence on clinical use of three-dimensional upper limb movement analysis (3D-ULMA) in children and adolescents with brachial plexus birth injury (BPBI).
METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science were searched for relevant studies up to April 2022. An automatic e-mail alert was installed to ensure no eligible article was missed. Articles evaluating 3D-ULMA in children and adolescents with BPBI were included. Covidence web-based platform was used for blind screening of eligible articles. Twenty-one observational studies with a final sample size of 609, encompassing 493 BPBI cases, met the inclusion criteria. Data were extracted using a custom form to support standardized extraction conforming to the Cochrane Checklist of items. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology checklist, and a specifically established quality assessment form for kinematic analysis studies.
RESULTS: Study setups differed, including six different types of kinematic devices. Twelve studies used the (modified) Mallet positions for their 3D-ULMA. Throughout the studies, 3D-ULMA was used for various purposes. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale scored 16 articles with five stars or more, indicating fair to moderate quality.
CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review summarizes the different 3D-ULMA kinematic devices, test protocols, and their clinical use for BPBI. The use of 3D-ULMA provides valuable, objective, and quantified data to clinicians with regard to movement strategies; it complements existing clinical scales and can be implemented to evaluate effectiveness of therapy interventions. Implications for future research and clinical practice are discussed.
METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science were searched for relevant studies up to April 2022. An automatic e-mail alert was installed to ensure no eligible article was missed. Articles evaluating 3D-ULMA in children and adolescents with BPBI were included. Covidence web-based platform was used for blind screening of eligible articles. Twenty-one observational studies with a final sample size of 609, encompassing 493 BPBI cases, met the inclusion criteria. Data were extracted using a custom form to support standardized extraction conforming to the Cochrane Checklist of items. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology checklist, and a specifically established quality assessment form for kinematic analysis studies.
RESULTS: Study setups differed, including six different types of kinematic devices. Twelve studies used the (modified) Mallet positions for their 3D-ULMA. Throughout the studies, 3D-ULMA was used for various purposes. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale scored 16 articles with five stars or more, indicating fair to moderate quality.
CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review summarizes the different 3D-ULMA kinematic devices, test protocols, and their clinical use for BPBI. The use of 3D-ULMA provides valuable, objective, and quantified data to clinicians with regard to movement strategies; it complements existing clinical scales and can be implemented to evaluate effectiveness of therapy interventions. Implications for future research and clinical practice are discussed.