Upper extremity pain after stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis on primary prevention.
Memnune A Denizli, Gauthier Everard, Patricia Dessart and 1 others
PMID 41424221WHAT IT FOUND
Most common prevention methods like slings, taping, and exercises did not significantly reduce upper limb pain after stroke.
Only intramuscular injections showed potential benefit, but evidence was very weak. Current guidelines lack strong data to support specific preventive strategies.
Key findings
01Orthotics, taping, and exercise showed no significant preventive effect on upper limb pain, with very low certainty of evidence.
02Intramuscular injections (calcitonin and botulinum toxin) were the only category showing significantly less pain compared to controls, though evidence certainty was low.
03Positioning, neuromuscular stimulation, and education had uncertain effects due to high heterogeneity and few studies, preventing pooled analysis.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
Very low to low certainty of evidence across most categories due to small sample sizes, high heterogeneity, and imprecision. Heterogeneity in pain measurement tools and definitions (e.g., pain at rest vs. during movement) made pooling difficult. Few studies focused specifically on prevention; many had pain as a secondary outcome. Blinding was often not feasible, introducing potential bias. Long-term effects were not well captured due to variable follow-up periods.
Declared interests
No specific funding or conflict of interest declarations were provided in the supplied text.
The easy way to misread this
Do not interpret the lack of significant effect for common interventions like slings and taping as proof they are harmful or useless for other purposes (e.g., support, comfort). The evidence is very low certainty, meaning the studies were too small or varied to detect a real benefit if one exists. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Summarised by AI from the full paper, without a clinician reviewing it. Check it against the source before it changes what you do. Read it on PubMed →