2026-10-11T20:38:58Z https://api.figshare.com/v2/oai

oai:figshare.com:article/33993532 2026-09-25T06:05:08Z category_452 portal_316 item_type_3 month_year_09_2026

Data Sheet 1_Systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions in restoring lower limb motor function after stroke.pdf Tokzhan Kispayeva (21752084) Inna Bolshakova (21752093) Akmaral Izbasarova (25107949) Zilola Mavlyanova (25107952) Tomiris Zhunussova (25107955) Neurocognitive Patterns and Neural Networks Fugl–Meyer assessment gait recovery lower limb meta-analysis rehabilitation robotic rehabilitation stroke Objective<p>To evaluate the effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions in improving lower limb motor function in patients after stroke based on a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.</p>Methods<p>A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed (MEDLINE), Scopus, and the Cochrane Library, supplemented by manual screening of reference lists. Randomized controlled trials involving adult patients after stroke comparing non-pharmacological interventions with conventional rehabilitation were included. The primary outcome was lower limb motor function assessed by the Fugl–Meyer Assessment of the Lower Extremity (FMA-LE). The review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 (RoB 2) tool. A random-effects model was applied to calculate pooled mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals.</p>Results<p>Fifteen randomized controlled trials were included in the systematic review, of which 14 studies involving 623 participants were included in the quantitative synthesis. Non-pharmacological interventions demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in lower limb motor function compared with conventional rehabilitation (MD = 3.06, 95% CI 1.97–4.16; Z = 5.48, p < 0.00001), with substantial heterogeneity (I² = 60%). In the subgroup analysis, robotic/mechanized rehabilitation interventions showed a significant positive effect (MD = 3.00, 95% CI 1.66–4.33; I² = 57%), as did other non-pharmacological interventions (MD = 3.15, 95% CI 0.94–5.35; I² = 68%). There was no statistically significant difference between the subgroups (p = 0.91; I² = 0%).</p>Conclusion<p>Non-pharmacological rehabilitation interventions were associated with a statistically significant improvement in lower limb motor function after stroke compared with conventional rehabilitation. Substantial heterogeneity was observed across the included studies, highlighting the need for further high-quality randomized controlled trials with standardized intervention protocols and longer follow-up.</p>Systematic review registration<p>https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251154919.</p> 2026-09-25T06:05:08Z Dataset Dataset 10.3389/fnhum.2026.1864828.s001 https://figshare.com/articles/dataset/Data_Sheet_1_Systematic_review_and_meta-analysis_of_the_effectiveness_of_non-pharmacological_interventions_in_restoring_lower_limb_motor_function_after_stroke_pdf/33993532 CC BY 4.0