Correlation Between Proprioceptive Impairment and Motor Deficits After Stroke: A Meta-Analysis Review

Introduction: Proprioceptive impairment is a common symptom after stroke. Clarifying how proprioception correlates with motor function after stroke may be helpful in optimizing proprioception-augmented movement training. Previous studies have shown inconsistent findings. A meta-analysis is an optimal method to explore the correlation and identify the factors contributing to these inconsistencies. Objective: To explore the correlation between proprioception and motor function after stroke through a meta-analysis, taking into account characteristics of the measurements used in these studies. Methods: We searched multiple databases until November 2021 for eligible studies that measured both proprioception and motor functions in persons with stroke and reported their correlation or data for correlation analysis. A meta-analysis of the correlations was performed. The subgroup analysis and meta-regression were further conducted to investigate potential factors contributing to the heterogeneity of correlation strength, based on the participants' characteristics, proprioception, and motor function measures. Results: In total, 28 studies comprising of 1,829 participants with stroke were included in the meta-analysis. The overall correlation between proprioception and motor function was significant (r = 0.267, p < 0.05), but there was heterogeneity across studies (I = 45%, p < 0.05). The results of the subgroup analysis showed proprioception of the axial segment in weight-bearing conditions (r = 0.443, p < 0.05) and upper limb without weight-bearing (r = 0.292, p < 0.05) had a stronger correlation with motor function than proprioception of the lower limb without weight-bearing. The proprioception measured through ipsilateral matching (r = 0.412, p < 0.05) showed a stronger correlation with motor function than through contralateral matching. The International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF) domains of motor function, movement function (r = 0.338, p < 0.05), activity performance (r = 0.239, p < 0.05), and independence (r = 0.319, p < 0.05) showed a stronger correlation with proprioception than with other domains. Conclusion: There is a significant correlation between proprioception and motor dysfunction after stroke. The proprioception measured in the axial segment under weight-bearing conditions or measured with ipsilateral matching, and motor function, specifically in the ICF domains of movement function, activity performance, and independence showed a positive contribution to the association between proprioception and motor function. The correlation does not imply causation and might be underestimated by attributes of current tests for proprioception and motor function. Further studies are needed to clarify the cause-effect relationship.