https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5708-9769
Figures
Abstract
Rehabilitation methods for executive dysfunction were focused on cognitive rehabilitation in patients with stroke and traumatic brain injury. However, no reviews have focused on the various rehabilitation methods and assessment of executive function in patients with only stroke and included various study designs. This study aimed to identify various interventions and assessments in patients with stroke and executive dysfunction via a scoping review. We searched for articles using the PubMed, Web of Science, and CINAHL databases. Two reviewers independently screened the articles based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria using the title, abstract, and full text. We subsequently determined the study design, sample size, time since stroke, intervention, and assessment. We extracted 1131 articles, of which 27 articles were selected. The study designs were randomized controlled trials (81.5%), pilot studies (11.1%), and feasibility studies (7.4%), with a total of 599 participants. Interventions varied from cognitive training (22.2%), virtual reality (22.2%), noninvasive brain stimulation (14.8%), and dual-task training (11.1%), with consistent results. The assessments used were the Trail Making Test Part B (70.4%), Stroop Color and Word Test (44.4%), Digit Symbol Test, Frontal Assessment Battery, and Tower of London test (11.1%). In conclusion, this scoping review provided various interventions and assessments in patients with stroke with executive dysfunction.
Citation: Sakai K, Hosoi Y, Tanabe J (2024) Intervention and assessment of executive dysfunction in patients with stroke: A scoping review. PLoS ONE 19(2): e0298000. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0298000
Editor: Kathleen Bennett, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, IRELAND
Received: October 9, 2023; Accepted: January 16, 2024; Published: February 6, 2024
Copyright: © 2024 Sakai et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Data Availability: All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.
Funding: The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.
Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Introduction
Executive function includes decision-making, risk-taking, planning, inhibitory control, working memory, and cognitive flexibility (speed, error processing, and attention) and is considered a higher brain function [1]. Despite it having various definitions [2,3], executive function is defined as a set of supervisory cognitive processes that integrates cognitive functions and supports the monitoring and regulation (task setting) of goal-directed behaviors [4]. Furthermore, the frontal lobes control these functions [5,6]; and impairment of other brain regions besides the frontal lobe and the widely distributed white matter results in executive dysfunction [5–8]. Approximately 25%–75% of stroke patients were reported to experience executive dysfunction, although this was related to the definition and assessment used [9,10]. Executive dysfunction is considered a silent epidemic because the impairment rarely manifests without assessment [9].
Executive dysfunction is associated with physical function and the ability to perform activities of daily living (ADL) and return to work [11–16]. Executive dysfunction is associated with walking ability in patients with stroke. Heyes et al. found a relationship between executive dysfunction and other walking tests, including a 10-m walking test, in patients with stroke [11]. Additionally, Sakai et al. reported that the degree of executive dysfunction was associated with performance on the Timed Up and Go test and a 10-m walking test in patients with stroke [12]. Lipskaya-Velikovsky et al. found a correlation between executive dysfunction and ADL in patients with stroke [14]. Moreover, Ownsworth et al. found that patients with stroke and executive dysfunction were less likely to return to work than patients with stroke without executive dysfunction [16]. Thus, executive dysfunction affects physical function and social reintegration.
Rehabilitation is necessary to improve executive dysfunction and facilitate the patient’s reintegration into society. Several rehabilitation methods have been previously reported in systematic reviews [17,18]. Cognitive training, such as working memory training, strategy training, and external compensatory approaches, improved executive dysfunction in patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) and patients with stroke [17,18]. Working memory training include performing auditory and visual tasks using a computer, and verbal working memory training include memory tasks using alphabets [17]. The strategy training included goal management training and a computer assignment that solved ADL or instrumental ADL problems [17]. The external compensatory approach included training with a paging system to aid memory and planning [17]. Outcomes of executive dysfunction in patients with TBI and stroke were assessed using the Executive Function Performance Test and Multiple Errands Test [17]. Thus, assessment of the effects of rehabilitation on executive dysfunction focused on cognitive rehabilitation, demonstrating varied effectiveness. In addition, these reviews included patients with TBI and with stroke, and the number of studies was limited [17,18]. Furthermore, these systematic reviews included limited types of study designs and lacked assessment and rehabilitation methods for patients with only stroke [17,18]. Reviews on the various rehabilitation methods and assessments focused on patients with only stroke are lacking and no consensus on intervention methods and assessments, despite executive dysfunction being highly prevalent [9,10] and having a considerable effect on patients’ return to society [14,16]. Therefore, there is a need to identify and map the ways that have been previously overlooked in which executive dysfunction is assessed and treated in patients with stroke and to include a variety of study designs. After this, these factors should be investigated using methods such as systematic reviews. By focusing only on patients with stroke and mapping out assessment and rehabilitation methods for executive dysfunction including various study designs, this review aimed to fill the knowledge gap regarding rehabilitation for executive dysfunction and to provide useful evidence. Therefore, through this scoping review, the purpose of this study was to identify articles that had not been found in previous systematic reviews and to map and organize the knowledge of various interventions and assessments for executive dysfunction in patients with stroke.
Methods
This scoping review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement [19] and reporting guidelines by Arksey et al. [20] and Levac et al. [21]. This study was conducted in five stages (stage 1, identifying the research question; stage 2, identifying relevant studies; stage 3, study selection; stage 4, charting the data; stage 5, collating, summarizing, and reporting the results), following the work of Arksey et al. [20] and Levac et al. [21]. Data charting and summarization were performed using an analytic framework. Three databases (PubMed, Web of Science, and CINAHL) were used to search for articles from database inception to December 12, 2023. The following search terms were used in PubMed: (“Stroke”[MeSH Terms] OR “Hemiplegia”[MeSH Terms] OR “Hemiparesis”[MeSH Terms]) AND (“Executive Function”[MeSH Terms] OR “Executive Function”[All Fields] OR “Executive dysfunction”[All Fields]) AND (“Rehabilitation”[MeSH Terms]). The following search terms were used in the Web of Science databases and CINAHL: (Stroke OR Hemiplegia OR Hemiparesis) AND (Executive function OR Executive dysfunction) AND Rehabilitation. All articles were imported via EndNote (Clarivate, London, UK), and duplicate articles were removed and exported into Microsoft Excel (Microsoft Corp., Redmond, WA, USA).
Two reviewers independently reviewed the titles, abstracts, and full texts based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria and recorded article acceptance or rejection in independent Excel files. Each independent file was then combined into a single file, the results of the two reviews were combined, and papers with discrepant results were extracted. Subsequently, a third reviewer reviewed disagreements and accepted or rejected the papers. The inclusion criteria were as follows: 1) presence of stroke, 2) age > 18 years, 3) written in English, 4) randomized controlled trials (RCTs), feasibility studies, and case series, and 5) assessments of executive function. The exclusion criteria were as follows: 1) absence of stroke; 2) age < 18 years; 3) not written in English; 4) the use of non-human animals; 5) editorials, commentaries, conference abstracts, letters, reviews, books, case reports, and cross-sectional studies; 6) inclusion of immediate effects of interventions; and 7) inclusion of intervention details and assessment not yet described. Subsequently, Excel was used to chart each study’s author names, study design, participant number, time since stroke, intervention description, intervention period, assessment, and intervention results, taken from the full texts, after screening.
Results
Fig 1 depicts the review process in the PRISMA diagram. From the three databases, 1131 articles were extracted; after removing duplicates, 857 articles were selected for primary screening. Following the inclusion/exclusion criteria described above, 52 papers were subjected to secondary screening and 25 papers were excluded. The reason for exclusion was that many articles did not provide detailed descriptions of the interventions or assessments. Finally, 27 papers were eligible for mapping. Table 1 indicates the results of the 27 selected articles. The rehabilitation methods newly identified in this study were virtual reality (VR), noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS), and dual-task (DT) training with the Trail Making Test (TMT) Part B being the most commonly used assessment, followed by the Stroop Color and Word Test (SCWT).
Study design, sample size, and stroke phase
Of the 27 articles, 22 (81.5%) [22–43], 3 (11.1%) [44–46], and 2 (7.4%) [47,48] articles were RCTs, pilot studies, and feasibility studies, respectively. The range of the sample sizes was 7–225 participants (mean 22.2 ± 13.0), with 599 participants in total. The range of time since stroke was 6 d to 5 years. Three (11.1%) [37,40,45], four, 13, and four articles included the acute (< 1 month), subacute (18.5%) [22,26,30,43,44], chronic (48.1%) [24,27–29,31–34,36,38,39,42,47,48], and subacute to chronic (14.8%) phases [23,25,35,46], respectively.
Interventions
Interventions were cognitive rehabilitation (6/27 articles, 22.2%) [27,35,39,45,47,48], VR (6/27 articles, 22.2%) [23,26,29,31,32,38], NIBS (4/27 articles, 14.8%) [25,26,28,40], DT training (3/27 articles, 11.1%) [22,33,34], and other various training methods (8/27 articles, 29.6%) [24,30,37,41–44,46]. The intervention period was at least twice a week, and the duration varied from 2 weeks to 3 months and was not consistent. Cognitive rehabilitation included executive function, memory, and working memory training using computers [27,35,39,45,47,48]. VR was used in a variety of ways, including tasks to practice the components of each executive and other (memory, decision making) function, systems to solve tasks through games, and systems to carry out training based on ADL [23,26,29,31,32,38]. Studies using NIBS used repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) to target the prefrontal cortex, but the parameters varied [25,26,28,40]. DT training was performed while walking, calculating, avoiding obstacles commonly occurring in daily life, and climbing stairs [22,33,34]. Although the intervention content was divided into several parts (cognitive rehabilitation, VR, NIBS, DT training), there was no consistent rehabilitation method. Other training included Robotics training [44], Constraint-induced movement Therapy [46], and various training [24,30,37,41–43].
Assessments
Assessments included the TMT Part B (19/27 articles, 70.4%) [22–24,26,27,30–36,41–43,45–48], SCWT (12/27, 44.4%) [25,26,28,30,33–35,37,40–42,44], Digit Symbol Test (3/27, 11.1%) [28,29,31], Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB) (3/27, 11.1%) [31,32,38], Tower of London Test (3/27, 11.1%) [25,43,44], Executive Function Performance Test (2/27, 7.4%) [22,36], and other assessments (i.e., Dysexecutive Questionnaire and Five-point Test) (4/27, 14.8%) [31,37,39,48].
Discussion
The purpose of this study was to identify articles that had not been found in previous systematic reviews and to map and organize the knowledge on various interventions and assessments for executive dysfunction in patients with stroke. We found 27 articles in three databases. We found several RCTs (81.5%), in which the stroke phase was mostly chronic (48.1%). The interventions were cognitive training (22.2%), VR (22.2%), NIBS (14.8%), and DT training (11.1%). The assessments were the TMT Part B (70.4%), SCWT (44.4%), Digit Symbol Test, and FAB, Tower of London Test (11.1%), and Executive Function Performance Test (7.4%). VR, NIBS, and DT training were the first rehabilitation methods extracted in this study. In addition, TMT Part B was the most commonly used assessment, and SCWT was also frequently used, and these assessments were also extracted for the first time in this study. This review provided various interventions and assessments in patients with stroke and executive dysfunction.
Interventions
The most common intervention was cognitive rehabilitation and VR (22.2%), followed by NIBS (14.8%), and DT training (11.1%). Cognitive rehabilitation was common, as described in a previous systematic review (17,18). This scoping review extracted, for the first time, the articles related to VR and NIBS, which have recently been used in several rehabilitation areas [49–56].
Cognitive rehabilitation involves various methods, and the cognitive training mapped in this review was traditional training similar to that described in previous studies [17,18]. Typical examples include executive and working memory training with personal computers [27,35,39,45,47] to solve problems using various modalities, including attention, memory, executive function, and vision [27,39,45,47]. Others included strategy training, including goal setting, execution, and evaluation to determine their achievements [35]. Previous systematic reviews that included patients with stroke and TBI and cognitive rehabilitation were extracted [17,18]. The rate of cognitive rehabilitation was high, although only patients with stroke were included, similarly to those in this review. Therefore, cognitive rehabilitation may be more common in the treatment of executive dysfunction.
In this scoping review, VR training for executive dysfunction in patients with stroke was extracted for the first time, including six articles (22.2%) [23,26,29,31,32,38]. Simple VR training included traditional computer-based cognitive rehabilitation methods implemented using VR [31]. Additionally, other VR training methods included patients visiting places they frequently went to in their daily lives in a simulated space to solve tasks (e.g., going to a supermarket to shop) [23] or patients solving tasks in a game [29,38]. Hence, the training content related more to daily life and real-life situations than cognitive rehabilitation.
Additionally, articles that used NIBS were extracted for the first time in this scoping review, which included four articles (14.8%) [25,26,28,40]. NIBS included tDCS [28], rTMS [25,40], and NIBS in conjunction with VR or traditional cognitive training [25,26,29,40]. We included a study in which 2–mA tDCS was applied to the prefrontal cortex for 20 min, with simultaneous cognitive training [28]. Additionally, we included studies in which rTMS was provided, with differences in stimulus frequency and each parameter, such as high and low frequency stimulation [25,40]. However, the stimulation region was commonly the prefrontal cortex [25,40]. The combined tDCS and VR study used stimulation of 20 min at 2–mA; however, the stimulation site was the primary motor cortex, and the VR was used to perform a motor task [26]. The articles extracted in this review used prefrontal cortex stimulation, sharing common stimulation areas, but NIBS has different effects depending on the stimulation areas and parameters. Therefore, examining various parameters is necessary in the future.
Additionally, three articles using DT training (11.1%) were extracted. DT training is performed while walking, calculating, avoiding obstacles common in daily life, and climbing stairs [22,34]. Additional training to add auditory stimuli to DTs, such as during calculations, was also reported [33]. DT training is more dynamic than other training methods (cognitive rehabilitation, VR, and NIBS) owing to its involvement of calculations and obstacle avoidance while walking. Daily life often involves DT situations.
Assessments
The TMT Part B was the most frequently used assessment (70.4%), followed by the SCWT (44.4%). In a previous systematic review of patients with only stroke, the TMT Part B was used in 3 of the 10 included articles (30%) [17]. The other seven articles were inconsistent [17]. The TMT Part B can be used to assess executive dysfunction, including attention, memory, sequencing, decision-making, automatic thinking, set-shifting, and cognitive flexibility [57–59]. We assumed that the TMT Part B would be used at a high rate because of its ease in determining intervention effectiveness compared with the method used in a previous review [17]. The SCWT can also be used to rapidly and easily assess executive function, including attention, processing speed, cognitive flexibility, and working memory [60,61]. However, the TMT Part B and SCWT include only limited aspects of executive dysfunction when compared with the FAB, the Behavioral Assessment of Dysexecutive Syndrome, and other assessments. Contrastingly, the FAB classifies executive function into six items and facilitates a rapid and easy assessment; however, it was used in 11.1% of the 27 included articles. This may be because the FAB is used in several studies involving elderly patients and patients with dementia and Alzheimer’s disease [62,63]. However, the FAB may be used as an assessment method when examining the effectiveness of each component because it can easily evaluate each component (i.e., conceptualization, intellectual flexibility, motor programs, sensitivity to interfering stimuli, inhibition, non-influence) of execution function. However, given that the FAB has a maximum score of 18 points with 0–3 points for each item, the ceiling and floor effects must be considered.
Future recommendations for research and interventions
This scoping review mapped existing cognitive rehabilitation as well as previously unreported rehabilitation methods such as NIBS and VR. This included studies that had been overlooked in previous systematic reviews. However, the interventions varied, the study designs were not uniform, and no established rehabilitation methods could be identified. NIBS (rTMS, tDCS) is expensive compared to VR, and VR is becoming increasingly available and inexpensive. Therefore, VR may be easier to implement in clinical rehabilitation settings. In addition, DT training is a method that could be reasonably adapted to patients without requiring special devices. The TMT Part B and SCWT were often used for assessment, but these can only capture a portion of executive dysfunction. However, we consider these easy-to-use evaluation tools because of their short evaluation time, high sensitivity compared with the FAB and Tower of London Test, and potential to sensitively reflect treatment effects. Therefore, future research in this area should consider study designs, conduct effectiveness testing of various rehabilitation methods, and use rating scales to assess various aspects.
Strengths and limitations
This scoping review focused on patients with stroke and various rehabilitation methods, using a widespread strict search of electronic databases (from RCTs to case series). This restricted the search to patients with stroke and provided an evaluation of intervention types and assessments that had previously been overlooked. However, this scoping review had some limitations. A clear definition of executive dysfunction was lacking, which may have resulted in some relevant articles being inadvertently omitted due to a difference in the terms being used (i.e., cognitive impairment). Additionally, executive function could not be itemized. Therefore, future research should define executive function using components and identify interventions and assessments, including their effects. Finally, the quality of the studies was not assessed in this study. This is because the quality assessment of studies in scoping reviews is not performed in the guidelines [20]. However, other previous guideline has indicated that a quality assessment of the study should be considered [2]. The current study includes five papers for which no quality assessment other than RCTs is possible, which would make it impossible to map the various assessments and intervention methods for executive dysfunction, which is the aim of this study. In addition, a systematic review is planned as the next step. Therefore, this study did not choose to assessment the quality of the study. However, in the case of scoping reviews that focus on intervention content, results, and parameters, study quality assessment should be considered.
Conclusions
In this scoping review, VR, NIBS, and DT training were extracted as rehabilitation methods. Additionally, TMT and SCWT were the most common assessments that determined the effectiveness of the intervention. However, the extracted articles varied in intervention duration, intensity settings, and protocols, and it was not possible to reach a consensus on intervention content. Therefore, future research should be conducted based on these factors. This review provided various interventions and assessments in patients with stroke and executive dysfunction.
Supporting information
S1 Checklist. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0298000.s001
(PDF)
References
- 1. Povroznik JM, Ozga JE, Vonder Haar C, Engler-Chiurazzi EB. Executive (dys)function after stroke: special considerations for behavioral pharmacology. Behav Pharmacol. 2018;29: 638–653. pmid:30215622
- 2. Baddeley A, Wilson B. Frontal amnesia and the dysexecutive syndrome. Brain Cogn. 1988;7: 212–230. pmid:3377900
- 3.
Lezak MD. Executive functions. In: Lezak MD, editor. Neuropsychological assessment. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 1983. pp. 38–40.
- 4. Baddeley A, Della Sala S. S. Working memory and executive control. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 1996;351: 1397–1403; discussion 1403. pmid:8941951
- 5. Meier EL, Kelly CR, Goldberg EB, Hillis AE. Executive control deficits and lesion correlates in acute left hemisphere stroke survivors with and without aphasia. Brain Imaging Behav. 2022;16: 868–877. pmid:34647269
- 6. Scheffer M, Kroeff C, Steigleder BG, Klein LA, Grassi-Oliveira R, de Almeida RMM. Right frontal stroke: extra-frontal lesions, executive functioning and impulsive behaviour. Psicol Refl Crít. 2016;29: 28.
- 7. Debette S, Markus HS. The clinical importance of white matter hyperintensities on brain magnetic resonance imaging: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2010;341: c3666. pmid:20660506
- 8. Veldsman M, Werden E, Egorova N, Khlif MS, Brodtmann A. Microstructural degeneration and cerebrovascular risk burden underlying executive dysfunction after stroke. Sci Rep. 2020;10: 17911. pmid:33087782
- 9. Zinn S, Bosworth HB, Hoenig HM, Swartzwelder HS. Executive function deficits in acute stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2007;88: 173–180. pmid:17270514
- 10. Levine DA, Galecki AT, Langa KM, Unverzagt FW, Kabeto MU, Giordani B, et al. Trajectory of cognitive decline after incident stroke. JAMA. 2015;314: 41–51. pmid:26151265
- 11. Hayes S, Donnellan C, Stokes E. Associations between executive function and physical function poststroke: A pilot study. Physiotherapy. 2013;99: 165–171. pmid:23219633
- 12. Sakai K, Hosoi Y, Harada Y. Walking ability associated with executive dysfunction in patients with stroke: A cross-sectional study. Brain Sci. 2023;13: 627. pmid:37190592
- 13. Hayes S, Donnellan C, Stokes E. Executive dysfunction and balance function post-stroke: A cross-sectional study. Physiotherapy. 2016;102: 64–70. pmid:26031841
- 14. Lipskaya-Velikovsky L, Zeilig G, Weingarden H, Rozental-Iluz C, Rand D. Executive functioning and daily living of individuals with chronic stroke: measurement and implications. Int J Rehabil Res. 2018;41: 122–127. pmid:29438112
- 15. Ghaffari A, Rostami HR, Akbarfahimi M. Predictors of Instrumental Activities of Daily Living performance in patients with stroke. Occup Ther Int. 2021;2021: 6675680. pmid:33727902
- 16. Ownsworth T, Shum D. Relationship between executive functions and productivity outcomes following stroke. Disabil Rehabil. 2008;30: 531–540. pmid:17852299
- 17. Poulin V, Korner-Bitensky N, Dawson DR. Stroke-specific executive function assessment: A literature review of performance-based tools. Aust Occup Ther J. 2013;60: 3–19. pmid:23414185
- 18. Chung CS, Pollock A, Campbell T, Durward BR, Hagen S. Cognitive rehabilitation for executive dysfunction in adults with stroke or other adult non-progressive acquired brain damage. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;2013: CD008391. pmid:23633354
- 19. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLOS Med. 2009;6: e1000097. pmid:19621072
- 20. Arksey H, O’Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Soc Res Methodol. 2005;8: 19–32.
- 21. Levac D, Colquhoun H, O’Brien KK. Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Implement Sci. 2010;5: 69. pmid:20854677
- 22. An HS, Kim DJ. Effects of activities of daily living-based dual-task training on upper extremity function, cognitive function, and quality of life in stroke patients. Osong Public Health Res Perspect. 2021;12: 304–313. pmid:34719222
- 23. Faria AL, Andrade A, Soares L, Badia I SB. Benefits of virtual reality based cognitive rehabilitation through simulated activities of daily living: a randomized controlled trial with stroke patients. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2016;13: 96. pmid:27806718
- 24. Gjellesvik TI, Becker F, Tjønna AE, Indredavik B, Lundgaard E, Solbakken H, et al. Effects of high-intensity interval training after stroke (the HIIT stroke study) on physical and cognitive function: A multicenter randomized controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2021;102: 1683–1691. pmid:34102144
- 25. Kim BR, Kim DY, Chun MH, Yi JH, Kwon JS. Effect of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on cognition and mood in stroke patients: a double-blind, sham-controlled trial. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2010;89: 362–368. pmid:20407301
- 26. Lee S, Cha H. The effect of clinical application of transcranial direct current stimulation combined with non-immersive virtual reality rehabilitation in stroke patients. Technol Health Care. 2022;30: 117–127. pmid:34250916
- 27. Lin ZC, Tao J, Gao YL, Yin DZ, Chen AZ, Chen LD. Analysis of central mechanism of cognitive training on cognitive impairment after stroke: resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging study. J Int Med Res. 2014;42: 659–668. pmid:24722262
- 28. Liu YW, Chen ZH, Luo J, Yin MY, Li LL, Yang YD, et al. Explore combined use of transcranial direct current stimulation and cognitive training on executive function after stroke. J Rehabil Med. 2021;53: jrm00162. pmid:33634831
- 29. Liu Z, He Z, Yuan J, Lin H, Fu C, Zhang Y, et al. Application of immersive virtual-reality-based puzzle games in elderly patients with post-stroke cognitive impairment: A pilot study. Brain Sci. 2022;13: 79. pmid:36672060
- 30. Liu-Ambrose T, Eng JJ. Exercise training and recreational activities to promote executive functions in chronic stroke: A proof-of-concept study. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2015;24: 130–137. pmid:25440324
- 31. Maier M, Ballester BR, Leiva Bañuelos N, Duarte Oller E, Verschure PFMJ. Adaptive conjunctive cognitive training (ACCT) in virtual reality for chronic stroke patients: a randomized controlled pilot trial. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2020;17: 42. pmid:32143674
- 32. Manuli A, Maggio MG, Latella D, Cannavò A, Balletta T, De Luca R, et al. Can robotic gait rehabilitation plus Virtual Reality affect cognitive and behavioural outcomes in patients with chronic stroke? A randomized controlled trial involving three different protocols. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2020;29: 104994. pmid:32689601
- 33. Park MO, Lee SH. Effects of cognitive-motor dual-task training combined with auditory motor synchronization training on cognitive functioning in individuals with chronic stroke: A pilot randomized controlled trial. Medicine (Baltimore). 2018;97: e10910. pmid:29851819
- 34. Park MO, Lee SH. Effect of a dual-task program with different cognitive tasks applied to stroke patients: A pilot randomized controlled trial. NeuroRehabilitation. 2019;44: 239–249. pmid:31006694
- 35. Poulin V, Korner-Bitensky N, Bherer L, Lussier M, Dawson DR. Comparison of two cognitive interventions for adults experiencing executive dysfunction post-stroke: a pilot study. Disabil Rehabil. 2017;39: 1–13. pmid:26750772
- 36. Rozental-Iluz C, Zeilig G, Weingarden H, Rand D. Improving executive function deficits by playing interactive video-games: secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial for individuals with chronic stroke. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2016;52: 508–515. pmid:26761562
- 37. Tarantino V, Burgio F, Toffano R, Rigon E, Meneghello F, Weis L, et al. Efficacy of a training on executive functions in potentiating rehabilitation effects in stroke patients. Brain Sci. 2021;11: 1002. pmid:34439621
- 38. Torrisi M, Maggio MG, De Cola MC, Zichittella C, Carmela C, Porcari B, et al. Beyond motor recovery after stroke: the role of hand robotic rehabilitation plus virtual reality in improving cognitive function. J Clin Neurosci. 2021;92: 11–16. pmid:34509235
- 39. van de Ven RM, Murre JMJ, Buitenweg JIV, Veltman DJ, Aaronson JA, Nijboer TCW, et al. The influence of computer-based cognitive flexibility training on subjective cognitive well-being after stroke: A multi-center randomized controlled trial. PLOS ONE. 2017;12: e0187582. pmid:29145410
- 40. Yu H, Liu S, Dai P, Wang Z, Liu C, Zhang H. Effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on gait and postural control ability of patients with executive dysfunction after stroke. Brain Sci. 2022;12: 1185. pmid:36138921
- 41. Bo W, Lei M, Tao S, Jie LT, Qian L, Lin FQ, Ping WX. Effects of combined intervention of physical exercise and cognitive training on cognitive function in stroke survivors with vascular cognitive impairment: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Rehabil. 2019;33: 54–63. pmid:30064268
- 42. Fernandez-Gonzalo R, Fernandez-Gonzalo S, Turon M, Prieto C, Tesch PA, García-Carreira MC. Muscle, functional and cognitive adaptations after flywheel resistance training in stroke patients: a pilot randomized controlled trial. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2016;13: 37. pmid:27052303
- 43. Pallesen H, Bjerk M, Pedersan AR, Nielsen JF, Evald L. The effects of high-intensity aerobic exercise on cognitive performance after stroke: a pilot randomised controlled trial. J Cent Nerv Syst Dis. 2019;11: 1179573519843493. pmid:31040737
- 44. Aprile I, Guardati G, Cipollini V, Papadopoulou D, Mastrorosa A, Castelli L, et al. Robotic rehabilitation: an opportunity to improve cognitive functions in subjects with stroke. An explorative study. Front Neurol. 2020;11: 588285. pmid:33329334
- 45. Eschweiler M, Bohr L, Kessler J, Fink GR, Kalbe E, Onur OA. Combined cognitive and motor training improves the outcome in the early phase after stroke and prevents a decline of executive functions: A pilot study. NeuroRehabilitation. 2021;48: 97–108. pmid:33386825
- 46. Mark VW, Woods AJ, Mennemeier M, Abbas S, Taub E. Cognitive assessment for CI therapy in the outpatient clinic. NeuroRehabilitation. 2006;21: 139–146. pmid:16917160
- 47. Burdea GC, Grampurohit N, Kim N, Polistico K, Kadaru A, Pollack S, et al. Feasibility of integrative games and novel therapeutic game controller for telerehabilitation of individuals chronic post-stroke living in the community. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2020;27: 321–336. pmid:31875775
- 48. Huber SK, Held JPO, de Bruin ED, Knols RH. Personalized motor-cognitive exergame training in chronic stroke patients-A feasibility study. Front Aging Neurosci. 2021;13: 730801. pmid:34744688
- 49. Su S, He J, Wang R, Chen Z, Zhou F. The effectiveness of virtual reality, augmented reality, and mixed reality rehabilitation in total knee arthroplasty: A systematic review and Meta-Analysis. J Arthroplasty. 2023: S0883-5403(23)00861-6. pmid:37598785
- 50. Rodríguez-Mansilla J, Bedmar-Vargas C, Garrido-Ardila EM, Torres-Piles ST, González-Sánchez B, Rodríguez-Domínguez MT, et al. Effects of virtual reality in the rehabilitation of Parkinson’s disease: A systematic review. J Clin Med. 2023;12: 4896. pmid:37568298
- 51. Han Y, Park S. Effectiveness of virtual reality on activities of daily living in children with cerebral palsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PeerJ. 2023;11: e15964. pmid:37667752
- 52. Yan Y, Tian M, Wang T, Wang X, Wang Y, Shi J. Transcranial magnetic stimulation effects on cognitive enhancement in mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer’s disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Neurol. 2023;14: 1209205. pmid:37528850
- 53. Chen JM, Li XL, Pan QH, Yang Y, Xu SM, Xu JW. Effects of non-invasive brain stimulation on motor function after spinal cord injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2023;20: 3. pmid:36635693
- 54. Lee ARYB Yau CE, Mai AS Tan WA, Ong BSY Yam NE, et al. Transcranial alternating current stimulation and its effects on cognition and the treatment of psychiatric disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ther Adv Chronic Dis. 2022;13: 20406223221140390. pmid:36479141
- 55. Vandendoorent B, Nackaerts E, Zoetewei D, Hulzinga F, Gilat M, Orban de Xivry JJ, et al. Effect of transcranial direct current stimulation on learning in older adults with and without Parkinson’s disease: A systematic review with meta-analysis. Brain Cogn. 2023;171: 106073. pmid:37611344
- 56. Metelski N, Gu Y, Quinn L, Friel KM, Gordon AM. Safety and efficacy of non-invasive brain stimulation for the upper extremities in children with cerebral palsy: A systematic review. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2023. pmid:37528530
- 57. Tamez E, Myerson J, Morris L, White DA, Baum C, Connor LT. Assessing executive abilities following acute stroke with the trail making test and digit span. Behav Neurol. 2011;24: 177–185. pmid:21876258
- 58. Edwards JD, Ross LA, Wadley VG, Clay OJ, Crowe M, Roenker DL, et al. The useful field of view test: normative data for older adults. Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2006;21: 275–286. pmid:16704918
- 59.
Reitan RM, Wolfson D. The Halstead-Reitan neuropsychological test battery. Tucson, Arizona: Neuropsychology Press; 1985.
- 60.
Golden CJ. Stroop color and word test: A manual for clinical and experimental uses. Chicago, Illinois: Stoelting Co; 1978.
- 61. Periáñez JA, Lubrini G, García-Gutiérrez A, Ríos-Lago M. Construct validity of the Stroop color-word test: influence of speed of visual search, verbal fluency, working memory, cognitive flexibility, and conflict monitoring. Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2021;36: 99–111. pmid:32514527
- 62. Hurtado-Pomares M, Carmen Terol-Cantero MC, Sánchez-Pérez A, Peral-Gómez P, Valera-Gran D, Navarrete-Muñoz EM. The frontal assessment battery in clinical practice: a systematic review. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2018;33: 237–251. pmid:28627719
- 63. Benke T, Karner E, Delazer M: FAB-D. FAB-D: German version of the Frontal Assessment Battery. J Neurol. German version. 2013;260: 2066–2072. pmid:23649609