The Cortical Motor Effects of PNS and AO on Motor Training in Chronic Stroke

August 8, 2018 updated by: LIU Hao, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University

The Motor Effects of Combined Peripheral Nerve Electrical Stimulation and Action Observation on the Affected Hand in People With Stroke

This study aimed to investigate if peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) paired with action observation (AO) would augment motor training in promoting corticomotor excitability for the paretic hand in people with stroke. Twenty subjects in chronic stage of stroke were exposed to 3 different interventions involving one-hour PNS or sham PNS paired with 30 minutes of AO or sham AO, all followed by 30 minutes of finger abduction training in 3 separate sessions.

Study Overview

Status

Status

Indicates the current recruitment status or the expanded access status.
Completed

Conditions

Conditions

The disease, disorder, syndrome, illness, or injury that is being studied. On ClinicalTrials.gov, conditions may also include other health-related issues, such as lifespan, quality of life, and health risks.

Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.

Detailed Description

The investigator's previous study (Liu & Au-Yeung, 2017; PMID: 28383292) has demonstrated that 1-hour peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) applied to the radial and ulnar nerves of the paretic UL of people with chronic stroke can increase transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS)-evoked excitability of corticomotor pathways in both hemispheres projected to the contralateral first dorsal interosseous (FDI) hand muscle, and also improve dexterity in the paretic hand. This bi-hemispheric effect of PNS suggests that certain additional therapies such as action observation (AO) and motor training should be incorporated to strengthen the plastic corticomotor adaptation specifically for paretic UL control. The hypothesis of this study is that PNS paired with AO would augment task training of the paretic hand by increasing the corticomotor excitability in the lesioned hemisphere for the trained hand muscle in people with stroke, with associated dexterity function improvement. Twenty subjects were recruited by convenience in the community. They then attended an assessment session to evaluate the baseline sensorimotor status of their paretic upper limb. After the clinical tests，the subjects were introduced the assessment procedure for measuring corticomotor excitability with transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). After 1-week intermission, the subjects returned for 3 intervention sessions with different protocols including (1)PNS+AO+Training; (2)PNS+AOsham+Training; and (3)PNSsham+AOsham+Training. These 3 intervention sessions were arranged in random sequence for subjects. For "PNS+AO+Training" session, electrical stimulation was applied to the radial and ulnar nerve (PNS) of the paretic arm for 60 minutes. During the last 30 minutes of PNS, action observation (AO) was introduced in which subjects were required to watch a series of video clips. After one hour's PNS+AO, the subjects then proceeded to a 30-minute period of motor training of paretic hand. During "PNS+AOsham+Training" session, PNS was given as described before. During the last 30 minutes of the PNS, subjects were shown different photos illustrating a letter, a number or a hand as AOsham. The protocol of motor training was the same as described before. In the session of "PNSsham+AOsham+Training", The 1-hour PNSsham was conducted with the electrical stimulation unit turned on but without current output. The protocols for AOsham and motor training were the same as those described before.

Study Type

Study Type

Describes the nature of a clinical study. Study types include interventional studies (also called clinical trials), observational studies (including patient registries), and expanded access.
Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

Enrollment

The number of participants in a clinical study. The "anticipated" enrollment is the target number of participants that the researchers need for the study.
20

Phase

Phase

The stage of a clinical trial studying a drug or biological product, based on definitions developed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The phase is based on the study's objective, the number of participants, and other characteristics. There are five phases: Early Phase 1 (formerly listed as Phase 0), Phase 1, Phase 2, Phase 3, and Phase 4. Not Applicable is used to describe trials without FDA-defined phases, including trials of devices or behavioral interventions.
  • Not Applicable

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

The key requirements that people who want to participate in a clinical study must meet or the characteristics they must have. Eligibility criteria consist of both inclusion criteria (which are required for a person to participate in the study) and exclusion criteria (which prevent a person from participating). Types of eligibility criteria include whether a study accepts healthy volunteers, has age or age group requirements, or is limited by sex.

Ages Eligible for Study

43 years to 80 years (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • age between 40 and 80 years;
  • has history of first hemispheric stroke of 6or more months;
  • presence of electromyographic signals in first dorsal interosseous (FDI) during active abduction of the index finger contralateral to the lesioned hemisphere;
  • medically stable;
  • able to comprehend instructions.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • past history of musculoskeletal or neurological impairment in the paretic upper limb;
  • recurrent stroke;
  • cognitive impairment (Mini-mental state examination (MMSE) < 24);
  • visual impairment not correctable by optical lens;
  • presence of metal in the head region or a cardiac pacemaker as contraindications for TMS (Rossi et al., 2009).

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Crossover Assignment
  • Masking: Single

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm

Participant Group / Arm

A group or subgroup of participants in a clinical trial that receives a specific intervention/treatment, or no intervention, according to the trial's protocol.
Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.
Experimental: PNS+AO+Training
adopted "PNS+AO+Training" as the intervention
Genetic: PNS+AO+Training
Electrical stimulation was applied to the radial and ulnar nerve (PNS) of the paretic arm for 60 minutes. During the last 30 minutes of PNS, action observation (AO) was introduced in which subjects were required to watch a series of video clips. After one hour's PNS+AO, the subjects then proceeded to a 30-minute period of motor training of paretic hand.
Experimental: PNS+AOsham+Training
adopted "PNS+AOsham+Training" as the intervention
Genetic: PNS+AOsham+Training
PNS was given as described before. During the last 30 minutes of the PNS, subjects were shown different photos illustrating a letter, a number or a hand as AOsham. The protocol of motor training was the same as described before.
Placebo Comparator: PNSsham+AOsham+Training
adopted "PNSsham+AOsham+Training" as the intervention
Genetic: PNSsham+AOsham+Training
The 1-hour PNSsham was conducted with the electrical stimulation unit turned on but without current output. The protocols for AOsham and motor training were the same as those described before.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, the planned outcome measure that is the most important for evaluating the effect of an intervention/treatment. Most clinical studies have one primary outcome measure, but some have more than one.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Corticomotor excitability evoked by Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS)
Time Frame: 90 minutes
Corticomotor excitability in terms of the slope of the MEP recruitment curve and peak MEP amplitude captured for the contralateral FDI hand muscle in both hemispheres were assessed.
90 minutes

Secondary Outcome Measures

Secondary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, a planned outcome measure that is not as important as the primary outcome measure for evaluating the effect of an intervention but is still of interest. Most clinical studies have more than one secondary outcome measure.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Hand dexterity of paretic hand evaluated with Purdue Pegboard
Time Frame: 24 hours
The score was the total number of pins inserted into the holes with paretic hand in 30 seconds.
24 hours

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Sponsor

The organization or person who initiates the study and who has authority and control over the study.
The Hong Kong Polytechnic University

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

Study Start

The actual date on which the first participant was enrolled in a clinical study. The "anticipated" study start date is the date that the researchers think will be the study start date.
June 23, 2014

Primary Completion (Actual)

Primary Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention to collect final data for the primary outcome measure. Whether the clinical study ended according to the protocol or was terminated does not affect this date. For clinical studies with more than one primary outcome measure with different completion dates, this term refers to the date on which data collection is completed for all the primary outcome measures. The "anticipated" primary completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the primary completion date for the study.
June 1, 2015

Study Completion (Actual)

Study Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention/treatment to collect final data for the primary outcome measures, secondary outcome measures, and adverse events (that is, the last participant's last visit). The "anticipated" study completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the study completion date.
June 30, 2015

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

First Submitted

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submitted a study record to ClinicalTrials.gov. There is typically a delay of a few days between the first submitted date and the record's availability on ClinicalTrials.gov (the first posted date).
June 28, 2018

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submits a study record that is consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. The sponsor or investigator may need to revise and submit a study record one or more times before NLM's QC review criteria are met. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
August 8, 2018

First Posted (Actual)

First Posted

The date on which the study record was first available on ClinicalTrials.gov after National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review has concluded. There is typically a delay of a few days between the date the study sponsor or investigator submitted the study record and the first posted date.
August 10, 2018

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

Last Update Posted

The most recent date on which changes to a study record were made available on ClinicalTrials.gov. There may be a delay between when the changes were submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov by the study's sponsor or investigator (the last update submitted date) and the last update posted date.
August 10, 2018

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator submitted changes to a study record that are consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
August 8, 2018

Last Verified

Last Verified

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator confirmed the information about a clinical study on ClinicalTrials.gov as accurate and current. If a study with a recruitment status of recruiting; not yet recruiting; or active, not recruiting has not been confirmed within the past 2 years, the study's recruitment status is shown as unknown.
August 1, 2018

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

Other Study ID Numbers

Identifiers or ID numbers other than the NCT number that are assigned to a clinical study by the study's sponsor, funders, or others. These numbers may include unique identifiers from other trial registries and National Institutes of Health grant numbers.
  • HSEARS20140617001-01

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

No

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

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.

Cookie Settings

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. For more details carefully read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. ...>>>You can change your preferences or withdraw your consent at any time by deleting the cookies from your website or computer as described in the policy. Please accept it and choose your preferences by ticking the corresponding boxes in the "Manage Settings" section below. Please carefully read our Terms of Service before you proceed with using any part of this website.
«Manage Settings