Biofeedback for Post-stroke Gait Retraining: A Review of Current Evidence and Future Research Directions in the Context of Emerging Technologies

Jacob Spencer, Steven L Wolf, Trisha M Kesar, Jacob Spencer, Steven L Wolf, Trisha M Kesar

Abstract

Real-time gait biofeedback is a promising rehabilitation strategy for improving biomechanical deficits in walking patterns of post-stroke individuals. Because wearable sensor technologies are creating avenues for novel applications of gait biofeedback, including use in tele-health, there is a need to evaluate the state of the current evidence regarding the effectiveness of biofeedback for post-stroke gait training. The objectives of this review are to: (1) evaluate the current state of biofeedback literature pertaining to post-stroke gait training; and (2) determine future research directions related to gait biofeedback in context of evolving technologies. Our overall goal was to determine whether gait biofeedback is effective at improving stroke gait deficits while also probing why and for whom gait biofeedback may be an efficacious treatment modality. Our literature review showed that the effects of gait biofeedback on post-stroke walking dysfunction are promising but are inconsistent in methodology and therefore results. We summarize sources of methodological heterogeneity in previous literature, such as inconsistencies in feedback target, feedback mode, dosage, practice structure, feedback structure, and patient characteristics. There is a need for larger-sample studies that directly compare different feedback parameters, employ more uniform experimental designs, and evaluate characteristics of potential responders. However, as these uncertainties in existing literature are resolved, the application of gait biofeedback has potential to extend neurorehabilitation clinicians' cues to individuals with post-stroke gait deficits during ambulation in clinical, home, and community settings, thereby increasing the quantity and quality of skilled repetitions during task-oriented stepping training. In addition to identifying gaps in previous research, we posit that future research directions should comprise an amalgam of mechanism-focused and clinical research studies, to develop evidence-informed decision-making guidelines for gait biofeedback strategies that are tailored to individual-specific gait and sensorimotor impairments. Wearable sensor technologies have the potential to transform gait biofeedback and provide greater access and wider array of options for clinicians while lowering rehabilitation costs. Novel sensing technologies will be particularly valuable for telehealth and home-based stepping exercise programs. In summary, gait biofeedback is a promising intervention strategy that can enhance efficacy of post-stroke gait rehabilitation in both clinical and tele-rehabilitation settings and warrants more in-depth research.

Keywords: cerebrovascular accident; gait rehabilitation; hemiparesis; locomotion; real-time biofeedback.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Copyright © 2021 Spencer, Wolf and Kesar.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
(A) Schematic showing the setup for gait biofeedback, where a targeted gait parameter (e.g., anterior-posterior ground reaction force or electromyographic (EMG) activation) is measured, processed, and real-time, accurate information about the ongoing gait parameter is provided to the user via a feedback mode (e.g., audio-visual interface). (B) The flowchart shows types of feedback targets—EMG, spatio-temporal (e.g., step length, cadence), kinematic (e.g., joint angles), kinetic (e.g., ankle moment) as well as different feedback modes (e.g., visual, audio, haptic) that we summarize in our review, and provided by Stanton et al. (C) Summary of methodological parameters that we identified as factors influencing previous research results on biofeedback targeting stroke gait deficits.

References

    1. Genthe K, Schenck C, Eicholtz S, Zajac-Cox L, Wolf S, Kesar TM. Effects of real-time gait biofeedback on paretic propulsion and gait biomechanics in individuals post-stroke. Top Stroke Rehabil. (2018) 25:186–93. 10.1080/10749357.2018.1436384
    1. Stanton R, Ada L, Dean CM, Preston E. Biofeedback improves performance in lower limb activities more than usual therapy in people following stroke: a systematic review. J Physiother. (2017) 63:11–6. 10.1016/j.jphys.2016.11.006
    1. Kondo K, Noonan KM, Freeman M, Ayers C, Morasco BJ, Kansagara D. Efficacy of biofeedback for medical conditions: an evidence map. J Gen Intern Med. (2019) 34:2883–93. 10.1007/s11606-019-05215-z
    1. Tate JJ, Milner CE. Real-time kinematic, temporospatial, and kinetic biofeedback during gait retraining in patients: a systematic review. Phys Ther. (2010) 90:1123–34. 10.2522/ptj.20080281
    1. Wolf SL. Essential considerations in the use of EMG biofeedback. Phys Ther. (1978) 58:25–31. 10.1093/ptj/58.1.25
    1. Baker M, Regenos E, Wolf SL, Basmajian JV. Developing strategies for biofeedback. Applications in neurologically handicapped patients. Phys Ther. (1977) 57:402–8. 10.1093/ptj/57.4.402
    1. Barcala L, Grecco LA, Colella F, Lucareli PR, Salgado AS, Oliveira CS. Visual biofeedback balance training using wii fit after stroke: a randomized controlled trial. J Phys Ther Sci. (2013) 25:1027–32. 10.1589/jpts.25.1027
    1. Ma CZ, Zheng YP, Lee WC. Changes in gait and plantar foot loading upon using vibrotactile wearable biofeedback system in patients with stroke. Top Stroke Rehabil. (2018) 25:20–7. 10.1080/10749357.2017.1380339
    1. Hollands KL, Pelton TA, Tyson SF, Hollands MA, van Vliet PM. Interventions for coordination of walking following stroke: systematic review. Gait Posture. (2012) 35:349–59. 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2011.10.355
    1. Nadeau S, Betschart M, Bethoux F. Gait analysis for poststroke rehabilitation: the relevance of biomechanical analysis and the impact of gait speed. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am. (2013) 24:265–76. 10.1016/j.pmr.2012.11.007
    1. Harris-Love ML, Forrester LW, Macko RF, Silver KH, Smith GV. Hemiparetic gait parameters in overground versus treadmill walking. Neurorehabilitation Neural Repair. (2001) 15:105–12. 10.1177/154596830101500204
    1. Benjamin EJ, Blaha MJ, Chiuve SE, Cushman M, Das SR, Deo R, et al. . Heart disease and stroke statistics-2017 update: a report from the American Heart Association. Circulation. (2017) 135:e146–603. 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000491
    1. Langhorne P, Coupar F, Pollock A. Motor recovery after stroke: a systematic review. Lancet Neurol. (2009) 8:741–54. 10.1016/S1474-4422(09)70150-4
    1. Woodford H, Price C. EMG biofeedback for the recovery of motor function after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. (2007) 2:CD004585. 10.1002/14651858.CD004585.pub2
    1. French B, Thomas LH, Coupe J, McMahon NE, Connell L, Harrison J, et al. . Repetitive task training for improving functional ability after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. (2016) 11:Cd006073. 10.1002/14651858.CD006073.pub3
    1. Hornby TG, Reisman DS, Ward IG, Scheets PL, Miller A, Haddad D, et al. . Clinical practice guideline to improve locomotor function following chronic stroke, incomplete spinal cord injury, and brain injury. J Neurol Phys Ther. (2020) 44:49–100. 10.1097/NPT.0000000000000303
    1. Horak F, King L, Mancini M. Role of body-worn movement monitor technology for balance and gait rehabilitation. Phys Ther. (2015) 95:461–70. 10.2522/ptj.20140253
    1. van Gelder LMA, Barnes A, Wheat JS, Heller BW. The use of biofeedback for gait retraining: a mapping review. Clin Biomech.(2018) 59:159–66. 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2018.09.020
    1. Semrau JA, Herter TM, Scott SH, Dukelow SP. Examining differences in patterns of sensory and motor recovery after stroke with robotics. Stroke. (2015) 46:3459–69. 10.1161/STROKEAHA.115.010750
    1. Choi YH, Kim JD, Lee JH, Cha YJ. Walking and balance ability gain from two types of gait intervention in adult patients with chronic hemiplegic stroke: a pilot study. Assist Technol. (2019) 31:112–5. 10.1080/10400435.2017.1387616
    1. Druzbicki M, Przysada G, Guzik A, Brzozowska-Magon A, Kolodziej K, Wolan-Nieroda A, et al. . The efficacy of gait training using a body weight support treadmill and visual biofeedback in patients with subacute stroke: a randomized controlled trial. Biomed Res Int. (2018) 2018:3812602. 10.1155/2018/3812602
    1. Druzbicki M, Guzik A, Przysada G, Kwolek A, Brzozowska-Magon A, Sobolewski M. Changes in gait symmetry after training on a treadmill with biofeedback in chronic stroke patients: a 6-month follow-up from a randomized controlled trial. Med Sci Monit. (2016) 22:4859–68. 10.12659/MSM.898420
    1. Jonsdottir J, Cattaneo D, Recalcati M, Regola A, Rabuffetti M, Ferrarin M, et al. . Task-oriented biofeedback to improve gait in individuals with chronic stroke: motor learning approach. Neurorehabilitation Neural Repair. (2010) 24:478–85. 10.1177/1545968309355986
    1. Morris ME, Matyas TA, Bach TM, Goldie PA. Electrogoniometric feedback: its effect on genu recurvatum in stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. (1992) 73:1147–54. PubMed PMID: 1463378.
    1. Brasileiro A, Gama G, Trigueiro L, Ribeiro T, Silva E, Galvao E, et al. . Influence of visual and auditory biofeedback on partial body weight support treadmill training of individuals with chronic hemiparesis: a randomized controlled clinical trial. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. (2015) 51:49–58.
    1. Sungkarat S, Fisher BE, Kovindha A. Efficacy of an insole shoe wedge and augmented pressure sensor for gait training in individuals with stroke: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Rehabil. (2011) 25:360–9. 10.1177/0269215510386125
    1. Jung K, Kim Y, Cha Y, In TS, Hur YG, Chung Y. Effects of gait training with a cane and an augmented pressure sensor for enhancement of weight bearing over the affected lower limb in patients with stroke: a randomized controlled pilot study. Clin Rehabil. (2015) 29:135–42. 10.1177/0269215514540923
    1. Afzal MR, Pyo S, Oh MK, Park YS, Yoon J. Evaluating the effects of delivering integrated kinesthetic and tactile cues to individuals with unilateral hemiparetic stroke during overground walking. J Neuroeng Rehabil. (2018) 15:33. 10.1186/s12984-018-0372-0
    1. Aruin AS, Hanke TA, Sharma A. Base of support feedback in gait rehabilitation. Int J Rehabil Res. (2003) 26:309–12. 10.1097/01.mrr.0000102059.48781.a8
    1. Bradley L, Hart BB, Mandana S, Flowers K, Riches M, Sanderson P. Electromyographic biofeedback for gait training after stroke. Clin Rehabil. (1998) 12:11–22. 10.1191/026921598677671932
    1. Wolf SL, Binder-MacLeod SA. Electromyographic biofeedback applications to the hemiplegic patient. Changes in lower extremity neuromuscular and functional status. Phys Ther. (1983) 63:1404–13. PubMed PMID: 6611661. 10.1093/ptj/63.9.1404
    1. Moreland JD, Thomson MA, Fuoco AR. Electromyographic biofeedback to improve lower extremity function after stroke: a meta-analysis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. (1998) 79:134–40. 10.1016/S0003-9993(98)90289-1
    1. Schleenbaker RE, Mainous AG, 3rd. Electromyographic biofeedback for neuromuscular reeducation in the hemiplegic stroke patient: a meta-analysis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. (1993) 74:1301–4. 10.1016/0003-9993(93)90083-M
    1. Tamburella F, Moreno JC, Herrera Valenzuela DS, Pisotta I, Iosa M, Cincotti F, et al. . Influences of the biofeedback content on robotic post-stroke gait rehabilitation: electromyographic vs. joint torque biofeedback. J Neuroeng Rehabil. (2019) 16:95. 10.1186/s12984-019-0558-0
    1. Basaglia N, Mazzini N, Boldrini P, Bacciglieri P, Contenti E, Ferraresi G. Biofeedback treatment of genu-recurvatum using an electrogoniometric device with an acoustic signal. One-year follow-up. Scand J Rehabil Med. (1989) 21:125–30. PubMed PMID: 2799310.
    1. Druzbicki M, Guzik A, Przysada G, Kwolek A, Brzozowska-Magon A. Efficacy of gait training using a treadmill with and without visual biofeedback in patients after stroke: a randomized study. J Rehabil Med. (2015) 47:419–25. 10.2340/16501977-1949
    1. Schenck C, Kesar TM. Effects of unilateral real-time biofeedback on propulsive forces during gait. J Neuroeng Rehabil. (2017) 14:52. 10.1186/s12984-017-0252-z
    1. Franz JR, Maletis M, Kram R. Real-time feedback enhances forward propulsion during walking in old adults. Clin Biomech. (2014) 29:68–74. 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2013.10.018
    1. Schenck C, Bakke D, Besier T. Haptic biofeedback induces changes in ankle push-off during walking. Gait Posture. (2019) 74:76–82. 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2019.07.252
    1. de Rooij IJ, van de Port IG, Meijer JG. Effect of virtual reality training on balance and gait ability in patients with stroke: systematic review and meta-analysis. Phys Ther. (2016) 96:1905–18. 10.2522/ptj.20160054
    1. Kang HK, Kim Y, Chung Y, Hwang S. Effects of treadmill training with optic flow on balance and gait in individuals following stroke: randomized controlled trials. Clin Rehabil. (2012) 26:246–55. 10.1177/0269215511419383
    1. Kim N, Park Y, Lee BH. Effects of community-based virtual reality treadmill training on balance ability in patients with chronic stroke. J Phys Ther Sci. (2015) 27:655–8. 10.1589/jpts.27.655
    1. Hung JW, Chou CX, Hsieh YW, Wu WC, Yu MY, Chen PC, et al. . Randomized comparison trial of balance training by using exergaming and conventional weight-shift therapy in patients with chronic stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. (2014) 95:1629–37. 10.1016/j.apmr.2014.04.029
    1. Liu J, Kim HB, Wolf SL, Kesar TM. Comparison of the immediate effects of audio, visual, or audiovisual gait biofeedback on propulsive force generation in able-bodied and post-stroke individuals. Appl Psychophysiol Biofeedback. (2020) 45:211–20. 10.1007/s10484-020-09464-1
    1. Pula JH, Yuen CA. Eyes and stroke: the visual aspects of cerebrovascular disease. Stroke Vasc Neurol. (2017) 2:210–20. 10.1136/svn-2017-000079
    1. Kessner SS, Bingel U, Thomalla G. Somatosensory deficits after stroke: a scoping review. Top Stroke Rehabil. (2016) 23:136–46. 10.1080/10749357.2015.1116822
    1. Maier M, Ballester BR, Verschure P. Principles of neurorehabilitation after stroke based on motor learning and brain plasticity mechanisms. Front Syst Neurosci. (2019) 13:74. 10.3389/fnsys.2019.00074
    1. Ronsse R, Puttemans V, Coxon JP, Goble DJ, Wagemans J, Wenderoth N, et al. . Motor learning with augmented feedback: modality-dependent behavioral and neural consequences. Cereb Cortex. (2011) 21:1283–94. 10.1093/cercor/bhq209
    1. Afzal MR, Lee H, Eizad A, Lee CH, Oh MK, Yoon J. Effects of vibrotactile biofeedback coding schemes on gait symmetry training of individuals with stroke. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. (2019) 27:1617–25. 10.1109/TNSRE.2019.2924682
    1. Shin J, Chung Y. Influence of visual feedback and rhythmic auditory cue on walking of chronic stroke patient induced by treadmill walking in real-time basis. NeuroRehabilitation. (2017) 41:445–52. 10.3233/NRE-162139
    1. Cherry-Allen KM, Statton MA, Celnik PA, Bastian AJ. A dual-learning paradigm simultaneously improves multiple features of gait post-stroke. Neurorehabilitation Neural Repair. (2018) 32:810–20. 10.1177/1545968318792623
    1. Stoykov ME, Madhavan S. Motor priming in neurorehabilitation. J Neurol Phys Ther. (2015) 39:33–42. 10.1097/NPT.0000000000000065
    1. Sivaramakrishnan A, Madhavan S. Combining transcranial direct current stimulation with aerobic exercise to optimize cortical priming in stroke. Appl Physiol Nutr Metabol. (2020). 10.1139/apnm-2020-0677. [Epub ahead of print].
    1. Cleland BT, Galick M, Huckstep A, Lenhart L, Madhavan S. Feasibility and safety of transcranial direct current stimulation in an outpatient rehabilitation setting after stroke. Brain Sci. (2020) 10:719. 10.3390/brainsci10100719
    1. Kindred JH, Wonsetler EC, Charalambous CC, Srivastava S, Marebwa BK, Bonilha L, et al. . Individualized responses to Ipsilesional high-frequency and contralesional low-frequency rTMS in chronic stroke: a pilot study to support the individualization of neuromodulation for rehabilitation. Front Human Neurosci. (2020) 14:578127. 10.3389/fnhum.2020.578127
    1. Tsaih PL, Chiu MJ, Luh JJ, Yang YR, Lin JJ, Hu MH. Practice variability combined with task-oriented electromyographic biofeedback enhances strength and balance in people with chronic stroke. Behav Neurol. (2018) 2018:7080218. 10.1155/2018/7080218
    1. Bernhardt J, Hayward KS, Kwakkel G, Ward NS, Wolf SL, Borschmann K, et al. . Agreed definitions and a shared vision for new standards in stroke recovery research: the stroke recovery and rehabilitation roundtable taskforce. Int J Stroke. (2017) 12:444–50. 10.1177/1747493017711816
    1. Stinear C, Ackerley S, Byblow W. Rehabilitation is initiated early after stroke, but most motor rehabilitation trials are not: a systematic review. Stroke. (2013) 44:2039–45. 10.1161/STROKEAHA.113.000968
    1. Sun JH, Tan L, Yu JT. Post-stroke cognitive impairment: epidemiology, mechanisms and management. Ann Transl Med. (2014) 2:80. 10.3978/j.issn.2305-5839.2014.08.05
    1. Wutzke CJ, Faldowski RA, Lewek MD. Individuals poststroke do not perceive their spatiotemporal gait asymmetries as abnormal. Phys Ther. (2015) 95:1244–53. 10.2522/ptj.20140482
    1. Roden-Reynolds DC, Walker MH, Wasserman CR, Dean JC. Hip proprioceptive feedback influences the control of mediolateral stability during human walking. J Neurophysiol. (2015) 114:2220–9. 10.1152/jn.00551.2015
    1. Pietrosimone B, McLeod MM, Florea D, Gribble PA, Tevald MA. Immediate increases in quadriceps corticomotor excitability during an electromyography biofeedback intervention. J Electromyogr Kinesiol. (2015) 25:316–22. 10.1016/j.jelekin.2014.11.007
    1. Kesar TM, Stinear JW, Wolf SL. The use of transcranial magnetic stimulation to evaluate cortical excitability of lower limb musculature: challenges and opportunities. Restorative Neurol Neurosci. (2018) 36:333–48. 10.3233/RNN-170801
    1. Porciuncula F, Roto AV, Kumar D, Davis I, Roy S, Walsh CJ, et al. . Wearable movement sensors for rehabilitation: a focused review of technological and clinical advances. PMR. (2018) 10(9Suppl.2):S220–32. 10.1016/j.pmrj.2018.06.013
    1. Poitras I, Dupuis F, Bielmann M, Campeau-Lecours A, Mercier C, Bouyer LJ, et al. . Validity and reliability of wearable sensors for joint angle estimation: a systematic review. Sensors. (2019) 19:71555. 10.3390/s19071555
    1. Renner KE, Williams DSB, Queen RM. The reliability and validity of the loadsol((R)) under various walking and running conditions. Sensors. (2019) 19:20265. 10.3390/s19020265
    1. Schlachetzki JCM, Barth J, Marxreiter F, Gossler J, Kohl Z, Reinfelder S, et al. . Wearable sensors objectively measure gait parameters in Parkinson's disease. PLoS ONE. (2017) 12:e0183989. 10.1371/journal.pone.0183989
    1. Balouchestani M, Krishnan S. Effective low-power wearable wireless surface EMG sensor design based on analog-compressed sensing. Sensors. (2014) 14:24305–28. 10.3390/s141224305
    1. Hughes J, Iida F. Multi-functional soft strain sensors for wearable physiological monitoring. Sensors. (2018) 18:113822. 10.3390/s18113822
    1. Schliessmann D, Nisser M, Schuld C, Gladow T, Derlien S, Heutehaus L, et al. . Trainer in a pocket - proof-of-concept of mobile, real-time, foot kinematics feedback for gait pattern normalization in individuals after stroke, incomplete spinal cord injury and elderly patients. J Neuroeng Rehabil. (2018) 15:44. 10.1186/s12984-018-0389-4
    1. Lohse KR, Lang CE, Boyd LA. Is more better? Using metadata to explore dose-response relationships in stroke rehabilitation. Stroke. (2014) 45:2053–8. 10.1161/STROKEAHA.114.004695
    1. Cramer SC, Dodakian L, Le V, See J, Augsburger R, McKenzie A, et al. . Efficacy of home-based telerehabilitation vs. in-clinic therapy for adults after stroke: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Neurol. (2019) 76:1079–87. 10.1001/jamaneurol.2019.1604
    1. Dorsch AK, Thomas S, Xu X, Kaiser W, Dobkin BH, investigators S. SIRRACT: an international randomized clinical trial of activity feedback during inpatient stroke rehabilitation enabled by wireless sensing. Neurorehabilitation Neural Repair. (2015) 29:407–15. 10.1177/1545968314550369
    1. Gordt K, Gerhardy T, Najafi B, Schwenk M. Effects of wearable sensor-based balance and gait training on balance, gait, and functional performance in healthy and patient populations: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Gerontology. (2018) 64:74–89. 10.1159/000481454

Source: PubMed

3
Abonneren