Stroke is one of the most common disabilities experienced by the elderly in the community. However, stroke progresses to a chronic level, patients are discharged from medical institutions and eventually no longer receive therapeutic interventions at home. In this systematic review, we compared home-based rehabilitation (HBR) with comparison for patients with stroke. Literature published in Cumulative Index for Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Embase, Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), PubMed, and Google Scholar were reviewed. A total of 1,158 studies were initially retrieved. After reading the full texts, 11 articles were included in the systematic review. Quality assessment of the included studies was conducted using Risk of Bias (RoB) 2.0, and Egger’s regression test was used to evaluate publication bias. Data analysis was performed using the R studio software (R Studio). According to the quality assessment using RoB 2.0, three studies were evaluated as low risk, two as of some concern, and three as high risk. The overall effect size was moderate (0.309). The value of the balance function was a small effect size (0.201), while the value of the gait function was a moderate effect size (0.353). The values were small and moderate effect (0.154, 0.411) for the chronic and subacute conditions, respectively. According to the Egger’s regression test, no publication bias was observed. The findings of this study indicate that HBR resulted in the greatest improvement in gait function in patients with subacute stroke compared to those with chronic stroke. Therefore, the application of this intervention to patients with stroke in the community is recommended.

INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
    1. Search Strategy
    2. Eligibility Criteria
    3. Data Extraction
    4. Quality Assessment
    5. Publication Bias
    6. Data Analyses
RESULTS
    1. General Characteristics of the Included Studies
    2. The Results of the Quality Assessment of the Study
    3. Overall Effect Size
    4. The Effect Size for Balance
    5. The Effect Size for Gait Function
    6. Effect Size Based on Onset
    7. Publication Bias
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSIONS
FUNDING
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
AUTHOR CONTRIBUTION
ORCID
REFERENCES

• Yong-gu Han(Department of Physical Therapy, the Graduate School, Yonsei University)
• Chung-hwi Yi(Department of Physical Therapy, College of Software and Digital Healthcare Convergence, Yonsei University, Wonju, Korea) Corresponding author