Treadmill training increased walking distance 40 m (95% CI 24 to 55) more than no intervention/non-walking intervention ( Figure 6b, see Figure 7b on the eAddenda for the detailed forest plot). The immediate effect of treadmill training versus overground on walking distance was examined by pooling data from two studies (Langhammer and Stanghelle 2010, Olawale et al 2011) involving 79 participants. There was no statistical difference in walking distance between treadmill training and overground training (MD −6 m, 95% CI −45 to 33) (Figure PF 01367338 8, see Figure 9 on the eAddenda for the detailed forest plot). No studies measured the effect of treadmill training versus

overground walking on walking distance beyond the intervention period. This review provides evidence that treadmill training without body weight support is effective at improving walking in people who are ambulatory

after stroke. Furthermore, the benefits appear to be maintained beyond the intervention period. inhibitors However, whether treadmill training is more beneficial than overground training is not known. Meta-analysis indicated that treadmill training produced benefits in terms of both walking speed and distance. Treadmill training produced 0.14 m/s faster walking and 40 m greater distance than no intervention/non-walking intervention immediately after intervention and these benefits were maintained beyond Alectinib supplier the intervention period. This effect is likely to be a conservative estimate of the effect of treadmill training, since some of the to non-walking interventions given to the control group (such as strengthening) may have had some effect on walking. Importantly, these benefits appear to be clinically meaningful. For example, Tilson et al (2010) demonstrated that a between-group difference in walking speed after stroke

of 0.16 m/s resulted in a 1-point improvement in the modified Rankin scale. Furthermore, there is no indication that the effect of treadmill training is different when carried out with subacute stroke undergoing hospitalbased rehabilitation or with chronic stroke after discharge from formal rehabilitation. This may be because the length and frequency of treadmill training sessions delivered was similar across studies (mean length 30 min, SD 4; mean frequency 4/wk, SD 1) despite the variation in duration of training program (mean duration 9 wk, SD 7). There are insufficient data to provide evidence as to whether treadmill training is better than overground training. Only three studies (Pohl et al 2002, Langhammer and Stanghelle 2010, Olawale et al 2011) investigating this question were found. Meta-analysis indicates no significant difference between treadmill training and overground training for both walking speed and distance.