You are here

Article Text

Article menu

Download PDFPDF

XML
Review
Verbal augmented feedback in the rehabilitation of lower extremity musculoskeletal dysfunctions: a systematic review
  1. Marianne Storberget1,
  2. Linn Helen J Grødahl1,
  3. Suzanne Snodgrass2,
  4. Paulette van Vliet2,
  5. Nicola Heneghan3
  1. 1School of Sport, Exercise and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
  2. 2School of Health Sciences (Physiotherapy), University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales, Australia
  3. 3Centre of Precision Rehabilitation for Spinal Pain, School of Sport, Exercise and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
  1. Correspondence to Marianne Storberget; mstorberget{at}hotmail.com

Abstract

Background Verbal augmented feedback (VAF) is commonly used in physiotherapy rehabilitation of individuals with lower extremity musculoskeletal dysfunction or to induce motor learning for injury prevention. Its effectiveness for acquisition, retention and transfer of learning of new skills in this population is unknown.

Objectives First, to investigate the effect of VAF for rehabilitation and prevention of lower extremity musculoskeletal dysfunction. Second, to determine its effect on motor learning and the stages of acquisition, retention and transfer in this population.

Design Systematic review designed in accordance with the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and reported in line with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Method MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed and five additional databases were searched to identify primary studies with a focus on VAF for prevention and rehabilitation of lower extremity musculoskeletal dysfunction. One reviewer screened the titles and abstracts. Two reviewers retrieved full text articles for final inclusion. The first reviewer extracted data, whereas the second reviewer audited. Two reviewers independently assessed risk of bias and quality of evidence using Cochrane Collaboration’s tool and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation, respectively.

Results Six studies were included, with a total sample of 304 participants. Participants included patients with lateral ankle sprain (n=76), postoperative ACL reconstruction (n=16) and healthy individuals in injury prevention (n=212). All six studies included acquisition, whereas retention was found in five studies. Only one study examined transfer of the achieved motor learning (n=36). VAF was found to be effective for improving lower extremity biomechanics and postural control with moderate evidence from five studies.

Conclusion VAF should be considered in the rehabilitation of lower extremity musculoskeletal dysfunctions. However, it cannot be unequivocally confirmed that VAF is effective in this population, owing to study heterogeneity and a lack of high-quality evidence. Nevertheless, positive effects on lower extremity biomechanics and postural control have been identified. This suggests that further research into this topic is warranted where an investigation of long-term effects of interventions is required. All stages (acquisition, retention and transfer) should be evaluated.

  • verbal augmented feedback
  • motor learning
  • musculoskeletal dysfunction
  • lower extremity
  • injury prevention

This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjsem-2017-000256

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Contributors MS was the first reviewer. LHJG was the second reviewer. SS, PvV and NH were coauthors. All authors read, edited and approved the final manuscript.

    • Funding The funding of the publication will be covered by the University of Birmingham.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

    • Data sharing statement No additional data are available.