Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

Objective To examine how well acute stroke studies assessing upper limb sensorimotor capacity align with the Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Roundtable (SRRR) recommendations, focussing on the type of assessment tools used, study and participant characteristics, follow-up timings, and the use of clinical and multimodal data. Design Scoping review. Data sources Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Google Scholar, and Web of Science were searched for relevant studies published between 01 August 2017 and 30 September 2025. Methods This review included studies involving adults with stroke who underwent upper limb assessment during the acute phase. Data were extracted on clinical, structural, and functional assessments, as well as follow-up timing, study, and participant characteristics. Of the 3628 identified articles, 132 met the inclusion criteria. Results While global assessments (e.g. NIH stroke scale [NIHSS]) and impairment-level upper limb assessments (e.g. Upper-extremity Fugl-Meyer Assessment) were widely used, activity-level tools (e.g. Action Research Arm Test) were underrepresented. Structural brain imaging was common, though often used only diagnostically, while functional brain imaging and multimodal approaches were rare. Follow-up timing varied, with limited long-term tracking. Demographic reporting was inconsistent, with underrepresentation of young adults and women. Conclusion Despite progress, significant gaps remain in the standardisation and comprehensiveness of upper limb assessment in acute stroke research. Future studies should better align with SRRR recommendations to improve data comparability and scientific rigour.

More information Original publication

DOI

10.1177/02692155251398368

Type

Journal article

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Publication Date

2025-11-26T00:00:00+00:00