Enhancing Abilities in Amputees and Patients With Peripheral Neuropathy Through Restoration of Sensory Feedback
Enhancing Functional and Cognitive Performances in People With Amputation and Peripheral Neuropathy Through the Restoration of Sensory Feedback in Real World and Virtual Reality Environments
Many amputees suffer from Phantom Limb Pain (PLP), a condition where painful perceptions arise from the missing limb. Leg amputees wear prostheses that do not provide any sensory feedback, apart from the stump-socket interaction. Increased physical effort associated with prosthesis use as well as discomfort often lead to rejection of artificial limbs. Additionally, the perception of the missing limb and its brain representation, do not match-up with what amputees see (the prosthesis) and this is made worse by the absence of sensory feedback. Therefore, re-establishing the sensory flow of information between the subject's brain and the prosthetic device is extremely important to avoid this mismatch, which creates inadequate embodiment. This study focuses on improving functional abilities and decreasing PLP in amputees thanks to the use of a system able to generate a sensory feedback (SF), which will be provided with a non-invasive electrical stimulation (ES). First, the possibility of enhancing the performance in different functional tasks thanks to the use of SF will be explored. Furthermore, it will be evaluated if SF enhances the prosthesis embodiment and helps restoring a multisensory integration (visuo-tactile), potentially providing also a pain relief. Once tested this system on amputees, also people with peripheral neuropathy and sensory loss will be recruited. Diabetic patients can suffer from symmetrical polyneuropathy (DSPN), which is a common complication caused by prolonged glucose unbalanced levels that lead to nerve damage. Non-invasive ES has been proposed and used as a therapy to treat the chronic pain conditions. In particular, TENS (transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation) is a type of non-invasive ES, which is able to activate large diameter afferent fibers. The gate control theory of pain states that these large diameter fibers inhibit central nociceptive transmission with a resultant decrease in pain perception. Therefore, also these patients will be recruited to see whether adding a non-invasive SF can enhance their functional motor abilities while diminishing their pain.
The subjects will perform a pool of the following tasks, depending on their residual abilities: motor tasks (walking on ground level and on stairs), cognitive tasks (dual tasks), subjective evaluation of prosthesis weight and description of sensations from ES.
Some tasks will be performed in Virtual Reality environments with and without an active stimulation.
Study Overview
Status
Status
Conditions
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Intervention / Treatment
Study Type
Study Type
Enrollment (Estimated)
Enrollment
Phase
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Contact
Study Contact
- Name: greta preatoni, PhD
- Phone Number: 0041 766274077
- Email: gretapreatoni1@gmail.com
Study Contact Backup
- Name: michele marazzi, PhD
- Phone Number: 0041 446322840
- Email: michele.marazzi@hest.ethz.ch
Study Locations
-
-
-
Zürich, Switzerland, 8006
- Recruiting
- ETH Zurich
-
Contact:
- Greta Preatoni, PhD
- Phone Number: 0041 0766274077
- Email: gretapreatoni1@gmail.com
-
Contact:
- Michele Marazzi, PhD
- Phone Number: 0041 +41446322840
- Email: michele.marazzi@hest.ethz.ch
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- transfemoral amputation or transtibial amputation or knee disarticulation or diabetic peripheral neuropathy
- the subject should be healthy other than the amputation and the diabetic neuropathy and in the range of 18-70 years old
- the subject should be able to comfortably walk, sit and stand alone
Exclusion Criteria:
- cognitive impairment
- pregnancy
- Prior or current psychological diseases such as borderline, schizophrenia, Depression or Maniac Depression
- acquired brain injury with residual impairment
- excessive sensitivity or pain to electrical stimulation with surface electrodes
- cybersickness
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Supportive Care
- Allocation: N/A
- Interventional Model: Single Group Assignment
- Masking: None (Open Label)
Number of Arms
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / ArmParticipant Group / Arm |
Intervention / TreatmentIntervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Experimental: experimental group
amputees or diabetics receiving intervention
|
Subjects will receive a sensory feedback provided by electrical stimulation
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Change from baseline in Visual Analogue scale for pain throughout the study
Time Frame: one month before the study, 2 weeks before the study, immediately before the intervention, immediately after the intervento, after tasks with and without sensory feedback, 2 weeks after last intervention, 1 month after last intervention
|
Subjects will complete VAS scale to measure pain level (from 0 to 10, 10 is worst pain immaginable)
|
one month before the study, 2 weeks before the study, immediately before the intervention, immediately after the intervento, after tasks with and without sensory feedback, 2 weeks after last intervention, 1 month after last intervention
|
|
Change between tasks with sensory feedback and with no sensory feedback in Ground Reaction Forces
Time Frame: during motor tasks up to 3 weeks
|
GRF will be assessed during motor perfomances of the subjects
|
during motor tasks up to 3 weeks
|
|
Change between tasks with sensory feedback and with no sensory feedback in Centre of Mass and Pressure
Time Frame: during motor tasks up to 3 weeks
|
CoM and CoP will be assessed during motor perfomances of the subjects
|
during motor tasks up to 3 weeks
|
|
Change from baseline and between tasks with sensory feedback and with no sensory feedback in Vo2 consumption
Time Frame: during motor tasks up to 3 weeks
|
metabolic consumption is going to be measured with mobile spiroergometry and compared after walking with and without sensory feedback
|
during motor tasks up to 3 weeks
|
|
Change from baseline between tasks with sensory feedback and with no sensory feedback in Embodiment
Time Frame: immediately after sessions up to 3 weeks
|
Embodiment will be measured with questionnaires (from -3 to +3, +3 totally agrees; two questions are from 1 to 10 (to measure vividness, where 10 is max vividness) and from 1 to 100 (to measure prevalence, where 100 is max duration of the embodiment feeling))
|
immediately after sessions up to 3 weeks
|
|
Change between tasks with sensory feedback and with no sensory feedback in Visual Analogue scale for confidence
Time Frame: immediately after sessions up to three weeks
|
Subjects will complete VAS scale to measure confidence level (from 0 to 10, where 10 is max confidence)
|
immediately after sessions up to three weeks
|
|
Change between tasks with sensory feedback and with no sensory feedback in Joint torque
Time Frame: during motor tasks up to three weeks
|
kinematic measurement
|
during motor tasks up to three weeks
|
|
Change in Proprioceptive drift between different conditions
Time Frame: Immediately after sessions in Virtual Reality up to three weeks
|
To measure embodiment subjects will be asked after VR sessions to indicate where they feel their leg without looking at the limb in real world.
This is a measure of embodiment.
|
Immediately after sessions in Virtual Reality up to three weeks
|
|
Change in Telescoping measures between different conditions
Time Frame: Immediately after sessions in Virtual Reality up to three weeks
|
To measure embodiment subjects will be asked after VR sessions to indicate how long they feel their leg without looking at the limb in real world.
This is a measure of embodiment.
|
Immediately after sessions in Virtual Reality up to three weeks
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Trinity Amputation and Prosthesis Experiences Scales
Time Frame: Immediately before intervention
|
Subjects will fill the TAPES to measure their satisfaction with the prosthesis (Scores range from 5 to 25, with higher scores indicating greater levels of adjustment)
|
Immediately before intervention
|
|
Change in Quality of Life in Neurological Disorders
Time Frame: one week before first session and one week after last session
|
QoL will be assessed through questionnaires to see if the intevention had impact on this aspect (All Neuro-QOL banks and scales are scored such that a high score reflects more of what is being measured)
|
one week before first session and one week after last session
|
|
Amputee Mobility Predictor
Time Frame: Immediately before the intervention
|
Subjects will perform AMPRO to assess K level (scores range from 0 to 47, correspoding to levels of mobility from 1(K1) to 4(K4), where 4 is the best level of mobility)
|
Immediately before the intervention
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Sponsor
Publications and helpful links
General Publications
- Melzack R, Wall PD. Pain mechanisms: a new theory. Science. 1965 Nov 19;150(3699):971-9. doi: 10.1126/science.150.3699.971. No abstract available.
- Dailey DL, Rakel BA, Vance CGT, Liebano RE, Amrit AS, Bush HM, Lee KS, Lee JE, Sluka KA. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation reduces pain, fatigue and hyperalgesia while restoring central inhibition in primary fibromyalgia. Pain. 2013 Nov;154(11):2554-2562. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2013.07.043. Epub 2013 Jul 27.
- Abbott CA, Malik RA, van Ross ER, Kulkarni J, Boulton AJ. Prevalence and characteristics of painful diabetic neuropathy in a large community-based diabetic population in the U.K. Diabetes Care. 2011 Oct;34(10):2220-4. doi: 10.2337/dc11-1108. Epub 2011 Aug 18.
- Archer AG, Watkins PJ, Thomas PK, Sharma AK, Payan J. The natural history of acute painful neuropathy in diabetes mellitus. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1983 Jun;46(6):491-9. doi: 10.1136/jnnp.46.6.491.
- Burke MJ, Roman V, Wright V. Bone and joint changes in lower limb amputees. Ann Rheum Dis. 1978 Jun;37(3):252-4. doi: 10.1136/ard.37.3.252.
- Antfolk C, D'Alonzo M, Rosen B, Lundborg G, Sebelius F, Cipriani C. Sensory feedback in upper limb prosthetics. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2013 Jan;10(1):45-54. doi: 10.1586/erd.12.68.
- Oddo CM, Raspopovic S, Artoni F, Mazzoni A, Spigler G, Petrini F, Giambattistelli F, Vecchio F, Miraglia F, Zollo L, Di Pino G, Camboni D, Carrozza MC, Guglielmelli E, Rossini PM, Faraguna U, Micera S. Intraneural stimulation elicits discrimination of textural features by artificial fingertip in intact and amputee humans. Elife. 2016 Mar 8;5:e09148. doi: 10.7554/eLife.09148.
- Charkhkar H, Shell CE, Marasco PD, Pinault GJ, Tyler DJ, Triolo RJ. High-density peripheral nerve cuffs restore natural sensation to individuals with lower-limb amputations. J Neural Eng. 2018 Oct;15(5):056002. doi: 10.1088/1741-2552/aac964. Epub 2018 Jun 1.
- Chow DH, Cheng CT. Quantitative analysis of the effects of audio biofeedback on weight-bearing characteristics of persons with transtibial amputation during early prosthetic ambulation. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2000 May-Jun;37(3):255-60.
- Tan DW, Schiefer MA, Keith MW, Anderson JR, Tyler J, Tyler DJ. A neural interface provides long-term stable natural touch perception. Sci Transl Med. 2014 Oct 8;6(257):257ra138. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.3008669.
- Dosen S, Markovic M, Strbac M, Belic M, Kojic V, Bijelic G, Keller T, Farina D. Multichannel Electrotactile Feedback With Spatial and Mixed Coding for Closed-Loop Control of Grasping Force in Hand Prostheses. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2017 Mar;25(3):183-195. doi: 10.1109/TNSRE.2016.2550864. Epub 2016 Apr 7.
- Clippinger FW, Seaber AV, McElhaney JH, Harrelson JM, Maxwell GM. Afferent sensory feedback for lower extremity prosthesis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1982 Sep;(169):202-6.
- Rognini G, Petrini FM, Raspopovic S, Valle G, Granata G, Strauss I, Solca M, Bello-Ruiz J, Herbelin B, Mange R, D'Anna E, Di Iorio R, Di Pino G, Andreu D, Guiraud D, Stieglitz T, Rossini PM, Serino A, Micera S, Blanke O. Multisensory bionic limb to achieve prosthesis embodiment and reduce distorted phantom limb perceptions. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2019 Jul;90(7):833-836. doi: 10.1136/jnnp-2018-318570. Epub 2018 Aug 12. No abstract available.
- Sadeghi H, Allard P, Prince F, Labelle H. Symmetry and limb dominance in able-bodied gait: a review. Gait Posture. 2000 Sep;12(1):34-45. doi: 10.1016/s0966-6362(00)00070-9.
- Naschitz JE, Lenger R. Why traumatic leg amputees are at increased risk for cardiovascular diseases. QJM. 2008 Apr;101(4):251-9. doi: 10.1093/qjmed/hcm131. Epub 2008 Feb 16.
- Kumar D, Marshall HJ. Diabetic peripheral neuropathy: amelioration of pain with transcutaneous electrostimulation. Diabetes Care. 1997 Nov;20(11):1702-5. doi: 10.2337/diacare.20.11.1702.
- Kumar D, Alvaro MS, Julka IS, Marshall HJ. Diabetic peripheral neuropathy. Effectiveness of electrotherapy and amitriptyline for symptomatic relief. Diabetes Care. 1998 Aug;21(8):1322-5. doi: 10.2337/diacare.21.8.1322.
- Lotze M, Moseley GL. Role of distorted body image in pain. Curr Rheumatol Rep. 2007 Dec;9(6):488-96. doi: 10.1007/s11926-007-0079-x.
- Petrini FM, Bumbasirevic M, Valle G, Ilic V, Mijovic P, Cvancara P, Barberi F, Katic N, Bortolotti D, Andreu D, Lechler K, Lesic A, Mazic S, Mijovic B, Guiraud D, Stieglitz T, Alexandersson A, Micera S, Raspopovic S. Sensory feedback restoration in leg amputees improves walking speed, metabolic cost and phantom pain. Nat Med. 2019 Sep;25(9):1356-1363. doi: 10.1038/s41591-019-0567-3. Epub 2019 Sep 9.
- Petrini FM, Valle G, Bumbasirevic M, Barberi F, Bortolotti D, Cvancara P, Hiairrassary A, Mijovic P, Sverrisson AO, Pedrocchi A, Divoux JL, Popovic I, Lechler K, Mijovic B, Guiraud D, Stieglitz T, Alexandersson A, Micera S, Lesic A, Raspopovic S. Enhancing functional abilities and cognitive integration of the lower limb prosthesis. Sci Transl Med. 2019 Oct 2;11(512):eaav8939. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.aav8939.
- Crea S, Edin BB, Knaepen K, Meeusen R, Vitiello N. Time-Discrete Vibrotactile Feedback Contributes to Improved Gait Symmetry in Patients With Lower Limb Amputations: Case Series. Phys Ther. 2017 Feb 1;97(2):198-207. doi: 10.2522/ptj.20150441. No abstract available.
- Bruce D, Hunter M, Peters K, Davis T, Davis W. Fear of falling is common in patients with type 2 diabetes and is associated with increased risk of falls. Age Ageing. 2015 Jul;44(4):687-90. doi: 10.1093/ageing/afv024. Epub 2015 Mar 3.
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Actual)
Study Start
Primary Completion (Estimated)
Primary Completion
Study Completion (Estimated)
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
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
Other Study ID Numbers
- 2019-N-97
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 Lower Limb Amputation Below Knee (Injury)
-
NCT05095584CompletedValidity and Reliability of The 3-Meter Backward Walk Test in Individuals With Lower Limb AmputationLower Limb Amputation Below Knee (Injury) | Lower Limb Amputation Knee
-
NCT04953364RecruitingLower Limb Amputation Below Knee (Injury) | Lower Limb Amputation Above Knee (Injury) | Amputation | Behavior | Lower Limb Amputation Knee
-
NCT04239222CompletedLower Limb Amputation Below Knee (Injury) | Lower Limb Amputation Above Knee (Injury) | Lower Limb Amputation Knee
-
NCT06419920RecruitingLower Limb Amputation Below Knee (Injury) | Lower Limb Amputation Above Knee (Injury) | Amputation | Lower Limb Amputation Knee | Lower Limb Amputation at Ankle (Injury) | Lower Limb Amputation at Hip (Injury)
-
NCT03550118CompletedLower Limb Amputation Below Knee (Injury)
-
NCT02124915CompletedLower Limb Amputation Below Knee (Injury)
-
NCT05818410RecruitingLower Limb Amputation Below Knee (Injury)
-
NCT05127993CompletedLower Limb Amputation Below Knee (Injury)
-
NCT04641845CompletedLower Limb Amputation Below Knee (Injury)
Clinical Trials on Sensory Feedback
-
NCT07032753Not yet recruitingAmputation | Amputation, Traumatic | Upper Limb Amputation Above Elbow (Injury) | Amputation, Surgical
-
NCT07324109RecruitingLower Limb Amputation Knee | Lower Limb Amputation Below Knee | Lower Limb Amputation Above Knee | Phantom Limb Pain After Amputation
-
NCT02589080Completed
-
NCT03876405CompletedProsthesis User | Amputation, Traumatic
-
NCT05824884CompletedFear of Heights | Specific Phobia, Situational
-
NCT06710119RecruitingLower Extremity Injuries
-
NCT04223245Completed