Özge Onursal Kılınç, Roel De Ridder, Muhammed Kılınç, Anke Van Bladel
Abstract
This systematic review aimed to pool available evidence of differences in trunk and lower extremity biomechanics during the different phases of a sit-to-stand (STS) task between persons with stroke and to healthy controls.
Four electronic databases (Medline, Web of Science, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library) were systematically searched up to, and including, December 2021. Studies were included if they investigated kinematic, kinetic and/or electromyographic outcome measures of adults with stroke during STS and compared results with healthy controls. Data from eligible studies were categorized according to STS subphases if reported (Phase I: Movement onset to seat-off; Seat-off; Phase II: Seat-off to movement termination; Whole task [if no subtasks reported]). The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess risk of bias.
Twenty-one studies were included in this systematic review. Methodological quality ranged from 13% to 75%; mean score was 55%. The findings of this systematic review suggest that after stroke, people rise to stand (phase I) with increased lateral trunk flexion and displacement of the centre of pressure (COP) towards the non-paretic side, decreased anterior pelvic tilt, decreased hip flexion and altered timing of lower limb muscle activation. In addition, during phase II, lateral pelvic translation and weight distribution asymmetry was increased, knee extension velocity was decreased and delayed, stabilization was decreased and COP velocity was increased compared with healthy subjects.
This systematic review clearly showed changes in kinematics, kinetics and muscle recruitment after stroke, with differences between the different phases of STS. Therapeutic interventions should focus on subphases of this functional task to optimize performance in daily living.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 May 2023.
All research outputs
#2,739,315
of 26,798,288 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Physical & Rehabilitation Medicine
#68
of 747 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#57,036
of 504,116 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Physical & Rehabilitation Medicine
#4
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,798,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 747 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 504,116 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
