Author: Caixia Hu1, Xiaohui Qin1,2, Minqing Jiang1, Miaoqing Tan1, Shuying Liu1, Yuhua Lu1, Changting Lin1, Richun Ye1
Affiliation: <sup>1</sup> Department of Neurology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine (Guangdong Provincial Hospital of Chinese Medicine), Guangzhou, China.
<sup>2</sup> Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Conference/Journal: Neural Plast
Date published: 2022 Mar 9
Other:
Volume ID: 2022 , Pages: 3895514 , Special Notes: doi: 10.1155/2022/3895514. , Word Count: 299
Background:
Tai chi (TC) has received increased attention in stroke rehabilitation, yet services are greatly underutilized. An increasing number of systematic reviews and meta-analyses (SRs/MAs) have begun to investigate the effects of TC on balance function in stroke patients. The aim of this current study was to systematically collate, appraise, and synthesize the results of these SRs/MAs using a systematic overview.
Methods:
Eight databases were searched: PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, CNKI, SinoMed, Chongqing VIP, and Wanfang Data. SRs/MAs of TC on balance function in stroke patients were included. Literature selection, data extraction, and assessment of the review quality were performed by two independent reviewers. Methodological quality was assessed by the Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR-2), reporting quality by Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), and evidence quality by Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE).
Results:
Nine SRs/MAs were included in this study. For methodological quality, what resulted in unsatisfactory methodological quality was noncompliance with critical item 4 (using a comprehensive literature search strategy) and critical item 7 (providing the list of excluded research literature). For reporting quality, what resulted in unsatisfactory reporting quality was inadequate reporting of Q1 (protocol and registration), Q8 (search), Q15 (risk of bias across studies), Q16 (additional analyses), Q22 (risk of bias across studies), Q23 (additional analysis), and Q27 (funding). For GRADE, the evidence quality was high in 0, moderate in 3, low in 11, and very low in 6. Risk of bias was the most common factor leading to downgrading of evidence, followed by inconsistency, imprecision, publication bias, and indirectness.
Conclusions:
TC may have beneficial effects on balance function in stroke survivors; however, this finding is limited by the generally low methodology, reporting quality, and evidence quality for published SRs/MAs.
PMID: 35309256 PMCID: PMC8926482 DOI: 10.1155/2022/3895514