Esta página se tradujo automáticamente y no se garantiza la precisión de la traducción. por favor refiérase a versión inglesa para un texto fuente.

Discrete Versus Rhythmic Gait Training

2 de mayo de 2017 actualizado por: Thais Amanda Rodrigues

Robot-assisted Locomotor Training After Severe Stroke: Discrete Versus Rhythmic Movement

The objective of this study is to compare the effects of novel versus standard locomotor training using a robotic gait orthosis (LT-RGO) after stroke. The hypothesis is that the novel LT-RGO protocol, by establishing a progressive decrease in gait velocity and guidance force, may facilitate greater motor recovery compared to the use of a standard protocol.

Descripción general del estudio

Estado

Terminado

Condiciones

Intervención / Tratamiento

Descripción detallada

Standard (rhythmic) robot-assisted locomotor training on a bodyweight-supported treadmill (LT-BWST) used progressively increased speed each week. Novel (discrete) robot-assisted LT-BWST used progressive decrease in speed. The novel approach of slowing down the treadmill reduced momentum. If speed had been increased (standard approach), momentum would have increased (momentum = mass * velocity); and the resulting, passive propulsion of momentum would have diminished the role of cortical skills needed to plan, initiate, and overtly control gait. In sum, the novel protocol used a slower-than-standard treadmill speed in order to provide a window of time sufficient for the corticomotor system to process information, learn, and adjust its response to internal and external feedback (eg, proprioceptive input; therapist input) during robot-assisted LT-BWST.

Tipo de estudio

Intervencionista

Inscripción (Actual)

20

Fase

  • No aplica

Contactos y Ubicaciones

Esta sección proporciona los datos de contacto de quienes realizan el estudio e información sobre dónde se lleva a cabo este estudio.

Ubicaciones de estudio

  • Brasil
      • Sao Paulo, Brasil, 05716-150
        • Instituto de Medicina Física e Reabilitação - Lucy Montoro

Criterios de participación

Los investigadores buscan personas que se ajusten a una determinada descripción, denominada criterio de elegibilidad. Algunos ejemplos de estos criterios son el estado de salud general de una persona o tratamientos previos.

Criterio de elegibilidad

Edades elegibles para estudiar

18 años y mayores (Adulto, Adulto Mayor)

Acepta Voluntarios Saludables

No

Géneros elegibles para el estudio

Todos

Descripción

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Clinical diagnosis of stroke and image with hemiparesis left or right;
  • No more that one ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke episode;
  • 06 months post-stroke;
  • Verified clinical stability on medical evaluation;
  • Spasticity level I or II in the Ashworth scale;
  • Score 1-2 in the Functional Ambulation Scale (FAC);
  • Signed informed consent.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Dependence to perform activities of daily living before the stroke;
  • Lack of clinical indications for exercises (such as cardiopulmonary instability and uncontrolled diabetes);
  • Severe cognitive impairment;
  • Serious psychiatric change that needs psychiatric care;
  • Severe osteoporosis;
  • Severe spasticity of the lower limbs, deformities or fixed contractures that prevent the achievement of movements;
  • Lack of resistance or disabling fatigue;
  • Body weight greater than 150 kg;
  • Unstable angina or other untreated heart disease;
  • Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease;
  • Unconsolidated fractures, pressure sores;
  • Other neurological diseases.

Plan de estudios

Esta sección proporciona detalles del plan de estudio, incluido cómo está diseñado el estudio y qué mide el estudio.

¿Cómo está diseñado el estudio?

Detalles de diseño

  • Propósito principal: Tratamiento
  • Asignación: Aleatorizado
  • Modelo Intervencionista: Asignación paralela
  • Enmascaramiento: Triple

Armas e Intervenciones

Grupo de participantes/brazo
Intervención / Tratamiento
Experimental: Novel Protocol
Progressive decrease of speed and guidance force on robotic gait training. Initial speed is 1.4 km/h and final speed is 1.0 km/h.
Procedimiento: Novel Protocol
All subjects performed robot-assissted LT-BWST 5 times a week for 6 weeks (30 minutes of training and 15 minutes of setup). Novel (discrete) robot-assisted LT-BWST used progressive decrease in speed. Both groups started the robot-assisted LT-BWST at the same speed of 1.4km/h. The body weight support started approximately at 40% of body weight for both groups and rapidly decreased each week. The guidance force was also progressively decreased for both groups so that the exoskeleton provided the least possible assistance to the subject.
Experimental: Standard Protocol
Progressive increase of speed and decrease of guidance force on robotic gait training. Initial speed is 1.4 km/h and final speed is 1.9 km/h.
Procedimiento: Standard Protocol
All subjects performed robot-assissted LT-BWST 5 times a week for 6 weeks (30 minutes of training and 15 minutes of setup). Standard (rhythmic) robot-assisted LT-BWST used progressively increased speed each week. Both groups started the robot-assisted LT-BWST at the same speed of 1.4km/h. The body weight support started approximately at 40% of body weight for both groups and rapidly decreased each week. The guidance force was also progressively decreased for both groups so that the exoskeleton provided the least possible assistance to the subject

¿Qué mide el estudio?

Medidas de resultado primarias

Medida de resultado
Medida Descripción
Periodo de tiempo
Functional Ambulation Scale (FAC)
Periodo de tiempo: Baseline and 6 weeks

The Functional Ambulation Scale (FAC) assesses an individual's independence during gait and follows a six-level scale: 0 - Patient can not walk or ask for help from two or more people; 1 - Patient requires continuous support from a person who assists with weight and balance; 2 - Patient needs continuous or intermittent support from a person to help with balance and coordination; 3 - Patient required for a person without physical contact; 4 - Patient can walk independently on the floor, but requires help on stairs and ramps; 5 - Patient can walk independently.

This study compared the gait independence by the FAC between the two Arms, after intervention as compared to baseline.
Baseline and 6 weeks

Medidas de resultado secundarias

Medida de resultado
Medida Descripción
Periodo de tiempo
Six-minute Walking Test (6MWT)
Periodo de tiempo: Baseline and 6 weeks
Change in distance of the gait applied test after intervention as compared to baseline
Baseline and 6 weeks
Time Up and Go (TUG)
Periodo de tiempo: Baseline and 6 weeks
This test assesses the level of mobility of the individual to measure the time spent to get up from a chair, walk a distance of 3 meters, turn around and return. This study compared the change in the time of the gait applied test after intervention as compared to baseline.
Baseline and 6 weeks
Ten-meters Walking Test (10MWT)
Periodo de tiempo: Baseline and 6 weeks
Change in the time of the gait applied test after intervention as compared to baseline
Baseline and 6 weeks
Lower Limbs Fugl-Meyer
Periodo de tiempo: Baseline and 6 weeks

The Fugl Meyer Scale is a cumulative numerical scoring system that is assessed by an individual: range of motion, pain, tenderness, upper and lower extremity motor function and balance, plus coordination and speed of movement, with total 226 points. A three-point ordinal scale is applied to each item: 0 - can not be performed, 1-performed partially and 2-performed completely. For this study it was only an evaluation of motor function of the extremity of lower limbs with a total score of 0 to 34 points. The lower score indicates greater motor impairment.

This study compared the change in motor function of lower limbs applied scale after intervention as compared to baseline
Baseline and 6 weeks
Berg Scale
Periodo de tiempo: Baseline and 6 weeks
Berg Scale is a functional scale of equilibrium performance, based on 14 common everyday items that evaluate the static and dynamic balance. The maximum scale score is 56 and each scale item has five alternatives ranging from 0 to 4 points. A score below 45 is considered a fall risk. This study comparede the change in the balance control applied scale after intervention as compared to baseline.
Baseline and 6 weeks

Colaboradores e Investigadores

Aquí es donde encontrará personas y organizaciones involucradas en este estudio.

Patrocinador

Thais Amanda Rodrigues

Investigadores

  • Silla de estudio: Daniel G Goroso, Doctor, University of Sao Paulo
  • Silla de estudio: Lumy Sawaki, PhD, University of Kentucky

Fechas de registro del estudio

Estas fechas rastrean el progreso del registro del estudio y los envíos de resultados resumidos a ClinicalTrials.gov. Los registros del estudio y los resultados informados son revisados ​​por la Biblioteca Nacional de Medicina (NLM) para asegurarse de que cumplan con los estándares de control de calidad específicos antes de publicarlos en el sitio web público.

Fechas importantes del estudio

Inicio del estudio

1 de noviembre de 2014

Finalización primaria (Actual)

1 de marzo de 2016

Finalización del estudio (Actual)

1 de septiembre de 2016

Fechas de registro del estudio

Enviado por primera vez

5 de enero de 2016

Primero enviado que cumplió con los criterios de control de calidad

6 de enero de 2016

Publicado por primera vez (Estimar)

8 de enero de 2016

Actualizaciones de registros de estudio

Última actualización publicada (Actual)

18 de septiembre de 2017

Última actualización enviada que cumplió con los criterios de control de calidad

2 de mayo de 2017

Última verificación

1 de mayo de 2017

Más información

Términos relacionados con este estudio

Palabras clave

Términos MeSH relevantes adicionales

Otros números de identificación del estudio

  • Robotics in Stroke

Plan de datos de participantes individuales (IPD)

¿Planea compartir datos de participantes individuales (IPD)?

INDECISO

Esta información se obtuvo directamente del sitio web clinicaltrials.gov sin cambios. Si tiene alguna solicitud para cambiar, eliminar o actualizar los detalles de su estudio, comuníquese con register@clinicaltrials.gov. Tan pronto como se implemente un cambio en clinicaltrials.gov, también se actualizará automáticamente en nuestro sitio web. .

Ensayos clínicos sobre Novel Protocol

Buscar ensayos similares

Patrocinadores y Colaboradores

Condiciones médicas

Intervenciones de drogas

CROs by country

CROs in Czech Republic

Condiciones

Enfermedades Raras

Intervenciones de drogas

Suplementos dietéticos

Patrocinador / Colaboradores

Localizaciones

3
Suscribir