Robotic Therapy and Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Patients With Stroke (ROTS)

October 15, 2020 updated by: University of Sao Paulo General Hospital
Stroke is the second cause of death worldwide and represented the first cause of death in Brazil between 2006 and 2010. Most patients survive, and there is a need to develop cost-effective rehabilitation strategies to decrease the burden of disability from stroke. This study addresses this important issue, by combining two different interventions in the early phase post-stroke: robotic therapy associated or not with transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), as adjuvant interventions to conventional physical therapy, for motor upper limb rehabilitation.

Study Overview

Detailed Description

Our main goal is to confirm the safety of robotic therapy associated with active tDCS and conventional therapy, compared to robotic therapy associated with sham tDCS and to conventional therapy, and to conventional therapy alone, for upper limb rehabilitation in an early phase (3-9 weeks) after stroke. Patients will be randomized to receive one of these three treatments, 3 times per week, for 6 weeks.

Data about eventual adverse effect will be collected in each session of treatment. The working hypothesis is that robotic therapy associated with active tDCS and conventional therapy will be as safe as robotic therapy associated with conventional therapy, and as conventional therapy alone.

We will aso preliminarily evaluate the efficacy of robotic therapy associated with active tDCS and conventional therapy, compared to robotic therapy associated with sham tDCS and to conventional therapy alone, in improvement of upper limb motor impairment.

Our secondary goals are: 1) To evaluate safety and upper limb motor impairments in patients submitted to each of the three interventions, 6 months after end of treatment; 2) To compare effects of the abovementioned interventions on disability, spasticity and quality of life, in patients at an early stage after stroke, immediately after treatment and 6 months later.

The working hypothesis is that the association of robotic therapy, tDCS and conventional therapy will lead to better outcomes than robotic therapy and conventional therapy, or conventional therapy alone.

Patients will be assessed before the first session and after the last session of treatment, as well as 6 months after the last session of treatment.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

9

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

    • SP
      • São Paulo, SP, Brazil, 05403900
        • Hospital das Clínicas

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

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke onset 3 - 9 weeks before the recruiting, confirmed by computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging.
  • Moderate to severe motor impairment of an upper limb, defined as a score between 7 - 42 on the Upper Limb Subscale of Fugl Meyer Assessment of Sensorimotor Recovery after stroke.
  • Ability to provide written informed consent (patient ou legal representative)
  • Ability to comply with the schedule of interventions and evaluations in the protocol.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Severe spasticity at the paretic elbow, wrist or fingers, defined as a score of > 3 on the Modified Ashworth Spasticity Scale.
  • Upper limb plegia
  • Uncontrolled medical problems such as end-stage cancer or renal disease
  • Pregnancy
  • Seizures, except for a single seizure during the first week post stroke
  • Pacemakers
  • Other neurological disorders such as Parkinson's disease
  • Psychiatric illness including severe depression
  • Aphasia ou severe cognitive deficits that compromise comprehension of the experimental protocol or ability to provide consent.
  • Hemineglect
  • Drugs that interfere on cortical excitability, except for antidepressants
  • Cerebellar lesions

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: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Triple

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Active Comparator: Active tDCS + robotic therapy + physical therapy

Active tDCS (transcranial direct current stimulation) will be applied prior to the robotic training. After robot training, the patient will receive physical therapy for 40 minutes.

Number of treatment sessions: 18 (3 times a week, for 6 weeks).

Robotic therapy (MIT - Manus, Interactive Motion Technologies) will be administered for 40 minutes to the paretic upper limb.
Active tDCS will be applied with the cathode positioned over the ipsilesional primary motor cortex and the anode over the contralateral supraorbital region for 20 minutes (1mA).
Physical therapy will be administered for 40 minutes.
Active Comparator: sham tDCS + robotic therapy + physical therapy

Sham tDCS (transcranial direct current stimulation) will be applied prior to robotic training. After robot training, the patient will receive physical therapy for 40 minutes.

Number of treatment sessions: 18 (3 times a week, for 6 weeks).

Robotic therapy (MIT - Manus, Interactive Motion Technologies) will be administered for 40 minutes to the paretic upper limb.
Physical therapy will be administered for 40 minutes.
In sham tDCS, no current will be delivered through the tDCS device.
Experimental: sham tDCS + physical therapy + occupational therapy
Sham tDCS (transcranial direct current stimulation) will be applied prior to conventional therapy (40 minutes of physical therapy and 40 minutes of occupational therapy) Number of treatment sessions: 18 (3 times a week, for 6 weeks).
Physical therapy will be administered for 40 minutes.
In sham tDCS, no current will be delivered through the tDCS device.
Occupational therapy will be administered for 40 minutes.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Change in Upper Extremity Fugl Meyer Assessment
Time Frame: 6 weeks from baseline
Change in Motor function subscale was assessed. Scores range from 0 to 66. Lower scores indicate greater severity.
6 weeks from baseline
Percentage of Sessions With Adverse Events
Time Frame: Post treatment (6 weeks from baseline).
Post treatment (6 weeks from baseline).

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Change in Modified Rankin Scale
Time Frame: 6 weeks from baseline
Scores range from 0 to 6. Higher scores indicate greater severity.
6 weeks from baseline
Change in National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale
Time Frame: 6 weeks from baseline
Scores range from 0 to 42. Higher scores indicate greater severity.
6 weeks from baseline
Change in Stroke Impact Scale
Time Frame: 6 weeks from baseline
Scores in each domain of the Stroke Impact Scale range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating a better quality of life. The change was calculated as the value at the later time point minus the value at the earlier time point; so that, positive numbers represent increases and negative numbers represent decreases.
6 weeks from baseline
Number of Participants Who Presented Score on Modified Ashworth Scale >2
Time Frame: 6 weeks
Scores range from 0 to 4, with 5 choices. A score of 1 indicates no resistance, and 4 indicates rigidity.
6 weeks
Change in Motor Activity Log
Time Frame: 6 weeks from baseline
Each domain contains taks scored on 0 to 5 ordinal scale. Lower scores indicate greater severity.
6 weeks from baseline
Upper Extremity Fugl Meyer Assessment
Time Frame: 6 months follow-up
Motor function subscale was assessed. Scores range from 0 to 66. Lower scores indicate greater severity.
6 months follow-up
Number of Participants With Adverse Events
Time Frame: 6 months follow-up
6 months follow-up
Change in Fatigue Severity Scale
Time Frame: 6 weeks from baseline

Fatigue Severity Scale is a 9 -item questionnaire. Each item scores on a 7-point scale.

The total score range from 9 to 63 points. Higher scores indicate greater fatigue.

6 weeks from baseline
Change in Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index
Time Frame: 6 weeks from baseline
The global Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index score is calculated by totaling the seven component scores, providing an overall score ranging from 0 to 21. Lower scores denote a healthier sleep quality.
6 weeks from baseline

Collaborators and Investigators

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

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Adriana B Conforto, MD Phd, University of Sao Paulo

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

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

June 1, 2015

Primary Completion (Actual)

December 1, 2016

Study Completion (Actual)

December 1, 2016

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

February 20, 2015

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

April 9, 2015

First Posted (Estimate)

April 15, 2015

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

October 20, 2020

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

October 15, 2020

Last Verified

December 1, 2015

More Information

Terms related to this study

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

product manufactured in and exported from the U.S.

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.

Clinical Trials on Stroke

Clinical Trials on Robotic Therapy

3
Subscribe