Promoting Recovery in Stroke Patients Through Cycling Therapy

Benefits of Biofeedback Cycling Training for Stroke Recovery

Biofeedback cycling training utilizes a stationary bike equipped with sensors that provide real-time feedback on performance metrics such as speed, resistance, and exertion levels. This approach not only engages patients in a physically demanding task but also allows them to visualize their performance, promoting greater engagement and motivation during rehabilitation sessions. Research indicates that this type of training can lead to significant improvements in lower extremity (LE) function, independence in mobility, and overall quality of life for stroke survivors.

A study involving 31 chronic stroke patients demonstrated that biofeedback cycling training led to improved scores in the lower extremity subscale of the Fugl-Meyer assessment (LE-FMA), 6-minute walk test (6MWT), and 10-meter walk test (10MWT). Specifically, participants showed enhanced LE motor function as evidenced by a statistically significant improvement in LE-FMA scores (p < 0.05), 6MWT (p < 0.001), and 10MWT (p < 0.001) after a 4-week intervention period (Yang et al., 2014). These outcomes suggest that integrating biofeedback cycling into rehabilitation programs can be a valuable tool for enhancing patient recovery.

Impact of Cycling on Lower Extremity Function and Mobility

Cycling therapy not only focuses on physical performance but also emphasizes the neuroplasticity inherent in rehabilitation. Neuroplasticity refers to the brain’s ability to adapt and reorganize itself in response to new experiences, which is vital for stroke recovery. The rhythmic and repetitive nature of cycling is believed to stimulate neural pathways involved in motor control, thereby facilitating recovery.

In a controlled study, patients who participated in a structured biofeedback cycling program exhibited a greater degree of improvement in their walking speed and endurance compared to those who received conventional rehabilitation alone (Yang et al., 2014). This emphasizes the role of biofeedback cycling as an adjunct to traditional therapies, enhancing the rehabilitation process by incorporating elements that promote active participation and engagement.

Table 1: Summary of Key Outcomes from Biofeedback Cycling Training

Study Design and Methodology for Evaluating Cycling Therapy

The effectiveness of biofeedback cycling training in stroke rehabilitation has been assessed through rigorous study designs. Typically, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are employed to evaluate the impact of the intervention against a control group receiving standard rehabilitation. Participants are randomly assigned to either the intervention group, which engages in biofeedback cycling, or a control group, which undergoes conventional rehabilitation methods.

In the study by Yang et al. (2014), patients were assigned to two groups using a crossover design. One group received conventional rehabilitation alongside cycling training, while the other group underwent conventional rehabilitation only. Outcome measures were assessed at baseline, after 4 weeks of cycling training, and at the end of the study (8 weeks) to monitor progress and determine the effectiveness of the intervention.

Key Outcomes: Functional Recovery and Walking Ability

The outcomes of biofeedback cycling training have demonstrated substantial improvements in functional recovery and walking ability among stroke patients. Notably, patients experienced:

• An increase in LE-FMA scores, indicating better motor function.
• Enhanced walking endurance as measured by the 6MWT.
• Improved walking speed in the 10MWT, indicating greater mobility.

These results highlight the potential of cycling therapy to not only facilitate physical rehabilitation but also enhance psychological well-being through increased engagement and motivation during recovery.

Implications for Rehabilitation Practices in Stroke Patients

Integrating biofeedback cycling training into stroke rehabilitation practices can significantly enhance patient outcomes. The findings from studies support the notion that cycling therapy can:

1. Enhance Motor Function: Improved LE function as evidenced by standardized assessments suggests cycling therapy should be a standard part of rehabilitation programs.
2. Promote Neuroplasticity: The repetitive nature of cycling may facilitate brain reorganization, leading to better recovery outcomes.
3. Increase Patient Engagement: The interactive component of biofeedback encourages active participation, making rehabilitation more enjoyable and effective for patients.

As healthcare providers seek to optimize rehabilitation strategies for stroke patients, incorporating innovative therapies like biofeedback cycling training can lead to improved functional outcomes and quality of life.

FAQ

What is biofeedback cycling training?
Biofeedback cycling training is a rehabilitation method that uses a stationary bike equipped with sensors to provide real-time feedback on cycling performance, helping patients engage more actively in their therapy.

How does cycling therapy benefit stroke patients?
Cycling therapy improves lower extremity function, enhances walking speed and endurance, promotes neuroplasticity, and increases patient engagement during rehabilitation.

What are the key outcome measures for cycling therapy in stroke rehabilitation?
Commonly used outcome measures include the lower extremity subscale of the Fugl-Meyer assessment (LE-FMA), the 6-minute walk test (6MWT), and the 10-meter walk test (10MWT).

Can cycling therapy be used for patients with chronic stroke?
Yes, studies have shown that biofeedback cycling training is effective for patients with chronic stroke, helping to improve their functional recovery and walking ability.

Is cycling therapy safe for stroke patients?
Yes, biofeedback cycling training has been shown to be safe and effective for stroke patients, with no significant adverse effects reported in clinical studies (Yang et al., 2014).

References

1. Yang, H.-C., Lee, C.-L., Lin, R., Hsu, M.-J., Chen, C.-H., & Lin, J.-H. (2014). Effect of biofeedback cycling training on functional recovery and walking ability of lower extremity in patients with stroke. Kaohsiung Journal of Medical Sciences, 30(1), 45-51
2. Rudroff, T., Rainio, O., & Klén, R. (2025). Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation and Artificial Intelligence in Communication Neuroprosthetics: A Bidirectional Approach for Speech and Hearing Impairments. Brain Sciences, 15(5), 449
3. Impellizzeri, F., Maggio, M. G., Bonanno, L., Thaut, M., Hurt, C., & Quartarone, A. (2025). The Use of Neurologic Music Therapy in Post-Stroke Aphasia Recovery: A Case Report on Linguistic Improvements and fMRI Correlates. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 14(10), 3436
4. Rauchmann, B.-S., & Ersözlü, E. (2025). Multimodal and longitudinal characterization of distinct tau and atrophy clusters in Alzheimer’s disease spectrum. Scientific Reports, 15, 98338. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-98338-9
5. Bao, J., Qiu, Y., Wang, T., Shang, L., & Wu, M. (2025). Predictive Accuracy of a Clinical Model for Carriage of Pathogenic/Likely Pathogenic Variants in Patients with Dementia and a Positive Family History at PUMCH. Biomedicines, 13(5), 1235
6. Jevtic, S., Wittlinger, M., Teimann, S., Wiltfang, J., & Scherbaum, N. (2025). Impact of dementia-landscaped therapy garden on psychological well-being– A pilot study. Journal of Neural Transmission, 365, 10.1007/s00702-025-02917-z. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00702-025-02917-z