Is the Rehabilitation Robotic a Safe and Effective Choice for Stroke Patients?
Study Overview
Status
Status
Conditions
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Intervention / Treatment
Detailed Description
Introduction The number of incident strokes, prevalent stroke survivors, disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) lost due to stroke, and stroke-related deaths is increasing in the word (1). Stroke is the most common cause of complex disability in Taiwan (2). After the acute phase of stroke, many patients are left with impairment of upper-limb movement (hemiparesis) because of the hand weakness and abnormal contractions. Motor recovery of the hand is the slowest and most difficult, leading to limited hand activities and occupational disability. Therefore, facilitating motor recovery of hand after stroke is crucial in stroke rehabilitation.
The mechanisms of recovery after stroke are multifactorial and the effect of rehabilitation programs is complex (3). Activity-dependent neural plasticity of the cortical maps adjacent to the lesion probably occurs, particularly during the acute period after stroke (4). In order to stimulate such plasticity, many new rehabilitation methods, including rehabilitation robots, have been developed according to the principles of motor learning (5). Robotic systems can provide repetitive, reproducible, interactive forms of physical therapy that can be quantified (6). The advantages of using robots in neuromotor rehabilitation includes favoring attention and reducing the effort of the patient during training (7), boosting motivation and adherence to treatment (8), as well as help in multi-sensory and sensorimotor integration (9). Some results are very promising, showing that robot-assisted therapy is safe and well tolerated and that it has a positive impact on muscle strength and function in the paretic arm (10-12). However, the quality of these evidence is still controversial and inconclusive. The effectiveness of robotic over conventional therapy is arguable and the best therapy strategy is still not clear. Furthermore, there is little understanding of the neurological mechanisms involved in functional recovery of the hand (13). In this study, the investigators hypothesize that the robot based assistance would outperform conventional therapy during the subacute stage of stroke.
Study objective
- To establish whether robot assisted therapy provides any additional motor recovery for the hand when administered during the subacute stage in a Chinese adult population diagnosed with stroke.
- To evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of robot-assisted hand rehabilitation in improving arm function abilities in subacute hemiplegic patients.
Study Type
Study Type
Enrollment (Actual)
Enrollment
Phase
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Locations
-
-
-
Taoyuan City, Taiwan
- Ten Chan General Hospital
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Genders Eligible for Study
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Adult patients (>20 years old) with a diagnosis of hemorrhagic or ischemic stroke and who experience severe upper extremity hemiparesis.
Exclusion Criteria:
- severe pain and instability in the wrist of the affected arm, severe cognitive impairment, aphasia, hemispatial neglect, apraxia and joint contractures greater than 20 degrees in the affected hand.
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: TREATMENT
- Allocation: RANDOMIZED
- Interventional Model: PARALLEL
- Masking: QUADRUPLE
Number of Arms
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / ArmParticipant Group / Arm |
Intervention / TreatmentIntervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
EXPERIMENTAL: Robotic
The experimental group will receive 30 minutes robotic training sessions, 3 times per week for a total of 30 sessions supervised by a research assistant.
Immediately following this robot training, these subjects will receive schedule (1-hour sessions, 3 times/week, 30 total sessions) of conventional therapy from an occupational therapist.
|
Participants will be placed in the robot and practice common hand tasks involving single finger range of motion exercise, grasping, and pinching objects.
Other Names:
An occupational therapist will provide one-on-one individualized programs focused on arm and hand function.
Treatment will include function-oriented specific tasks, such as reach, grasp, transport and release of various objects between different targets.
|
|
ACTIVE_COMPARATOR: Conventional
In conventional therapy group, participants will receive an one-hour of one-on-one treatment (1-hour sessions, 3 times/week, 30 total sessions) from an occupational therapist, focusing on arm and hand function.
|
An occupational therapist will provide one-on-one individualized programs focused on arm and hand function.
Treatment will include function-oriented specific tasks, such as reach, grasp, transport and release of various objects between different targets.
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Change in Fugl-Meyer score
Time Frame: Change from baseline to 10 weeks
|
The investigators used FMA scale to evaluate sensorimotor recovery of patients with particular attention to the hand and wrist section (maximum score=24) to assess the functional capacity of the affected hand.
|
Change from baseline to 10 weeks
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Change in Motricity Index (MI) scale
Time Frame: Change from baseline to 10 weeks
|
The Motricity Index was used to measure strength in upper and lower extremities after stroke.
The weighted score based on the ordinal 6 point scale of Medical Research Council was used to measure maximal isometric muscle strength.
|
Change from baseline to 10 weeks
|
|
Change in Functional Independence Measure scale (FIM)
Time Frame: Change from baseline to 10 weeks
|
The investigators used FIM to assess the degree of independence and need-of-assistance in basic activities of daily living at enrolment and at the end of the study.
FIM is an 18-item ordinal scale rated from 1 (total dependence) to 7 (total independence) per item; 13 items of this scale, the sub-scale Motor- FIM, were used to evaluate motor disability.
|
Change from baseline to 10 weeks
|
|
Change in Visual analogue scale (VAS)
Time Frame: Change from baseline to 10 weeks
|
The investigators used VAS (0 extremely simple- 10 extremely difficult) to access the feasibility of the device in terms of the number of patients who completed the program.
|
Change from baseline to 10 weeks
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Sponsor
Collaborators
Collaborators
Investigators
Investigators
- Principal Investigator: Chia-yu Hsu, MD, Ten-Chan General hospital
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (ACTUAL)
Study Start
Primary Completion (ACTUAL)
Primary Completion
Study Completion (ACTUAL)
Study Completion
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (ACTUAL)
First Posted
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (ACTUAL)
Last Update Posted
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Keywords
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
Other Study ID Numbers
- TenChenGH
Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)
Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.
Clinical Trials on Stroke
-
NCT07224178RecruitingHemorrhagic Stroke | Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source | Ischemic Stroke, Cryptogenic | Recurrent Ischemic Stroke | Ischemic Stroke, Embolic
-
NCT07208422RecruitingStroke | Stroke Hemorrhagic | Stroke Ischemic | Hemiparesis After Stroke
-
NCT07433972Not yet recruitingIschemic Stroke | Hemorrhagic Stroke | Subacute Stroke | Chronic Stroke Survivors
-
NCT07236216RecruitingIschemic Stroke | Hemorrhagic Stroke | Subacute Stroke | Chronic Stroke Patient
-
NCT04956185RecruitingStroke | Stroke, Ischemic | Stroke, Acute | Stroke Sequelae | Stroke Hemorrhagic
-
NCT05046106Not yet recruitingStroke | Stroke, Ischemic | Stroke Sequelae | Stroke, Cardiovascular | Strokes Thrombotic | Stroke, Embolic | Stroke, Cryptogenic
-
NCT06127602RecruitingStroke, Ischemic | Stroke Hemorrhagic | Stroke, Cerebrovascular
-
NCT05815368RecruitingStroke | Stroke, Ischemic | Stroke Sequelae | Stroke Hemorrhagic
-
NCT07199322Not yet recruitingStroke | Stroke Hemorrhagic | Upper Limb Rehabilitation | Stroke Ischemic
-
NCT07478042CompletedAcute Ischemic Stroke | Acute Ischemic Stroke AIS | Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients
Clinical Trials on Robotic
-
NCT02350790Completed
-
NCT01059357Completed
-
NCT05815823Completedthe Effect of Virtual Reality on Stroke Rehabilitation
-
NCT06710626Enrolling by invitationAmyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) | Spinal Cord Injury (SCI) | Quadriplegia | Tetraplegia/Tetraparesis | Spinal Cord Injury Cervical
-
NCT02443558Completed
-
NCT06641973Not yet recruitingAnorexia Nervosa | Bulimia Nervosa | Feeding Disorders
-
NCT03917511Completed
-
NCT00381966Completed