Video Game Rehabilitation for Outpatient Stroke (VIGoROUS): protocol for a multi-center comparative effectiveness trial of in-home gamified constraint-induced movement therapy for rehabilitation of chronic upper extremity hemiparesis

Lynne V Gauthier, Chelsea Kane, Alexandra Borstad, Nancy Strahl, Gitendra Uswatte, Edward Taub, David Morris, Alli Hall, Melissa Arakelian, Victor Mark, Lynne V Gauthier, Chelsea Kane, Alexandra Borstad, Nancy Strahl, Gitendra Uswatte, Edward Taub, David Morris, Alli Hall, Melissa Arakelian, Victor Mark

Abstract

Background: Constraint-Induced Movement therapy (CI therapy) is shown to reduce disability, increase use of the more affected arm/hand, and promote brain plasticity for individuals with upper extremity hemiparesis post-stroke. Randomized controlled trials consistently demonstrate that CI therapy is superior to other rehabilitation paradigms, yet it is available to only a small minority of the estimated 1.2 million chronic stroke survivors with upper extremity disability. The current study aims to establish the comparative effectiveness of a novel, patient-centered approach to rehabilitation utilizing newly developed, inexpensive, and commercially available gaming technology to disseminate CI therapy to underserved individuals. Video game delivery of CI therapy will be compared against traditional clinic-based CI therapy and standard upper extremity rehabilitation. Additionally, individual factors that differentially influence response to one treatment versus another will be examined.

Methods: This protocol outlines a multi-site, randomized controlled trial with parallel group design. Two hundred twenty four adults with chronic hemiparesis post-stroke will be recruited at four sites. Participants are randomized to one of four study groups: (1) traditional clinic-based CI therapy, (2) therapist-as-consultant video game CI therapy, (3) therapist-as-consultant video game CI therapy with additional therapist contact via telerehabilitation/video consultation, and (4) standard upper extremity rehabilitation. After 6-month follow-up, individuals assigned to the standard upper extremity rehabilitation condition crossover to stand-alone video game CI therapy preceded by a therapist consultation. All interventions are delivered over a period of three weeks. Primary outcome measures include motor improvement as measured by the Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT), quality of arm use for daily activities as measured by Motor Activity Log (MAL), and quality of life as measured by the Quality of Life in Neurological Disorders (NeuroQOL).

Discussion: This multi-site RCT is designed to determine comparative effectiveness of in-home technology-based delivery of CI therapy versus standard upper extremity rehabilitation and in-clinic CI therapy. The study design also enables evaluation of the effect of therapist contact time on treatment outcomes within a therapist-as-consultant model of gaming and technology-based rehabilitation.

Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02631850 .

Keywords: CI therapy; Constraint-induced movement therapy; Hemiparesis; Motor; Protocol; Randomized controlled trial; Rehabilitation; Research design; Stroke; Video game; Virtual reality.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Screen capture of the Recovery Rapids gaming environment
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Schematic illustrating the randomization process

References

    1. Gladstone DJ, Black SE, Hakim AM. Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario Centre of Excellence in stroke recovery. Toward wisdom from failure: lessons from neuroprotective stroke trials and new therapeutic directions. Stroke. 2002;33(8):2123–2136. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.0000025518.34157.51.
    1. Duncan PW, Zorowitz R, Bates B, Choi JY, Glasberg JJ, Graham GD, et al. Management of Adult Stroke Rehabilitation Care: a clinical practice guideline. Stroke. 2005;36(9):e100–e143. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.0000180861.54180.FF.
    1. Dhamoon MS, Moon YP, Paik MC, Boden-Albala B, Rundek T, Sacco RL, et al. Long-term functional recovery after first ischemic stroke: the northern Manhattan study. Stroke. 2009;40(8):2805–2811. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.109.549576.
    1. Lang CE, Macdonald JR, Reisman DS, Boyd L, Jacobson Kimberley T, Schindler-Ivens SM, et al. Observation of amounts of movement practice provided during stroke rehabilitation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2009;90(10):1692–1698. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2009.04.005.
    1. Wolf SL, Winstein CJ, Miller JP, Taub E, Uswatte G, Morris D, et al. Effect of constraint-induced movement therapy on upper extremity function 3 to 9 months after stroke: the EXCITE randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2006;296(17):2095–2104. doi: 10.1001/jama.296.17.2095.
    1. Birkenmeier RL, Prager EM, Lang CE. Translating animal doses of task-specific training to people with chronic stroke in 1-hour therapy sessions: a proof-of-concept study. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2010;24(7):620–635. doi: 10.1177/1545968310361957.
    1. Lang C, Lohsec K, Birkenmeiera R. Dose and timing in neurorehabilitation: prescribing motor therapy after stroke. Curr Opin Neurol. 2015;28(6):549–555. doi: 10.1097/WCO.0000000000000256.
    1. Schaefer SY, Patterson CB, Lang CE. Transfer of training between distinct motor tasks after stroke: implications for task-specific approaches to upper-extremity neurorehabilitation. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2013;27(7):602–612. doi: 10.1177/1545968313481279.
    1. Shepherd RB. Exercise and training to optimize functional motor performance in stroke: driving neural reorganization? Neural Plast. 2001;8(1–2):121–129. doi: 10.1155/NP.2001.121.
    1. Teasell R, Foley N, Salter K, Bhogal S, Jutai J, Speechley M. Evidence-based review of stroke rehabilitation: executive summary, 12th edition. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2009;16(6):463–488. doi: 10.1310/tsr1606-463.
    1. French B, Thomas LH, Leathley MJ, et al. Repetitive task training for improving functional ability after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007;Issue 4. Art. No.: CD006073. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006073.pub2.
    1. Takebayashi T, Koyama T, Amano S, Hanada K, Tabusadani M, Hosomi M, et al. A 6-month follow-up after constraint-induced movement therapy with and without transfer package for patients with hemiparesis after stroke: a pilot quasi-randomized controlled trial. Clin Rehabil. 2012;27(5):418–426. doi: 10.1177/0269215512460779.
    1. Taub E, Uswatte G, Mark VW, Morris DM, Barman J, Bowman MH, et al. Method for enhancing real-world use of a more affected arm in chronic stroke: transfer package of constraint-induced movement therapy. Stroke. 2013;44(5):1383–1388. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.111.000559.
    1. Gauthier LV, Taub E, Perkins C, Ortmann M, Mark VW, Uswatte G. Remodeling the brain: plastic structural brain changes produced by different motor therapies after stroke. Stroke. 2008;39(5):1520–1525. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.107.502229.
    1. Sterling C, Taub E, Davis D, Rickards T, Gauthier LV, Griffin A, et al. Structural neuroplastic change after constraint-induced movement therapy in children with cerebral palsy. Pediatrics. 2013;131(5):e1664–e1669. doi: 10.1542/peds.2012-2051.
    1. Barzel A, Ketels G, Stark A, Tetzlaff B, Daubmann A, Wegscheider K, et al. Home-based constraint-induced movement therapy for patients with upper limb dysfunction after stroke (HOMECIMT): a cluster-randomised, controlled trial. Lancet Neurol. 2015;14(9):893–902. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(15)00147-7.
    1. Taub E, Uswatte G, Mark VW, Morris DM. The learned nonuse phenomenon: implications for rehabilitation. Eura Medicophys. 2006;42(3):241–256.
    1. Morris DM, Taub E, Mark VW. Constraint-induced movement therapy: characterizing the intervention protocol. Eura Medicophys. 2006;42(3):257–268.
    1. Taub E, Uswatte G, King DK, Morris D, Crago JE, Chatterjee A. A placebo-controlled trial of constraint-induced movement therapy for upper extremity after stroke. Stroke. 2006;37(4):1045–1049. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.0000206463.66461.97.
    1. McIntyre A, Viana R, Janzen S, Mehta S, Pereira S, Teasell R. Systematic review and meta-analysis of constraint-induced movement therapy in the hemiparetic upper extremity more than six months post stroke. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2012;19(6):499–513. doi: 10.1310/tsr1906-499.
    1. Shi YX, Tian JH, Yang KH, Zhao Y. Modified constraint-induced movement therapy versus traditional rehabilitation in patients with upper-extremity dysfunction after stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2011;92(6):972–982. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2010.12.036.
    1. Lin KC, Chang YF, Wu CY, Chen YA. Effects of constraint-induced therapy versus bilateral arm training on motor performance, daily functions, and quality of life in stroke survivors. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2009;23(5):441–448. doi: 10.1177/1545968308328719.
    1. Wu CY, Chuang LL, Lin KC, Chen HC, Tsay PK. Randomized trial of distributed constraint-induced therapy versus bilateral arm training for the rehabilitation of upper-limb motor control and function after stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2011;25(2):130–139. doi: 10.1177/1545968310380686.
    1. Stevenson T, Thalman L, Christie H, Poluha W. Constraint-induced movement therapy compared to dose-matched interventions for upper-limb dysfunction in adult survivors of stroke: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Physiother Can. 2012;64(4):397–413. doi: 10.3138/ptc.2011-24.
    1. Taub E, Miller NE, Novack TA. Cook EW,3rd, Fleming WC, Nepomuceno CS, et al. technique to improve chronic motor deficit after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1993;74(4):347–354.
    1. Wolf SL, Winstein CJ, Miller JP, Thompson PA, Taub E, Uswatte G, et al. Retention of upper limb function in stroke survivors who have received constraint-induced movement therapy: the EXCITE randomised trial. Lancet Neurol. 2008;7(1):33–40. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(07)70294-6.
    1. Shaw SE, Morris DM, Uswatte G, McKay S, Meythaler JM, Taub E. Constraint-induced movement therapy for recovery of upper-limb function following traumatic brain injury. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2005;42(6):769. doi: 10.1682/JRRD.2005.06.0094.
    1. Uswatte G, Taub E, Morris D, Barman J, Crago J. Contribution of the shaping and restraint components of constraint-induced movement therapy to treatment outcome. NeuroRehabil. 2006;21:147–156.
    1. Lindsay MP, Gubitz G, Bayley M, Hill MD, Davies-Schinkel C, Singh S, and Phillips S. Canadian best practice recommendations for stroke care (Update 2010). On behalf of the Canadian Stroke Strategy Best Practices and Standards Writing Group. 2010; Ottawa, Ontario Canada: Canadian Stroke Network.
    1. Miller E, Murray L, Richards L, Zorowitz R, Bakas T, Clark P, et al. Comprehensive overview of nursing and interdisciplinary rehabilitation care of the stroke patient: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Stroke. 2010;41:2402–2448. doi: 10.1161/STR.0b013e3181e7512b.
    1. Walker J, Pink MJ. Occupational therapists and the use of constraint-induced movement therapy in neurological practice. Aust Occup Ther J. 2009;56(6):436–437. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1630.2009.00825.x.
    1. Viana R, Teasell R. Barriers to the implementation of constraint-induced movement therapy into practice. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2012;19(2):104–114. doi: 10.1310/tsr1902-104.
    1. Brogardh C, Vestling M, Sjolund BH. Shortened constraint-induced movement therapy in subacute stroke - no effect of using a restraint: a randomized controlled study with independent observers. J Rehabil Med. 2009;41(4):231–236. doi: 10.2340/16501977-0312.
    1. Brogardh C, Lexell J. A 1-year follow-up after shortened constraint-induced movement therapy with and without mitt poststroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2010;91(3):460–464. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2009.11.009.
    1. Corbetta D, Sirtori V, Castellini G, Moja L, Gatti R. Constraint-induced movement therapy for upper limb (arm) recovery after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;10:CD004433.
    1. Lum PS, Taub E, Schwandt D, Postman M. Automated constraint-induced therapy extension (AutoCITE) for movement deficits after stroke. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2004;41(3):249. doi: 10.1682/JRRD.2003.06.0092.
    1. Taub E, Lum PS, Hardin P, Mark VW, Uswatte G. AutoCITE: automated delivery of CI therapy with reduced effort by therapists. Stroke. 2005;36:1301–1304. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.0000166043.27545.e8.
    1. Lum PS, Uswatte G, Taub E, Hardin P, Mark VW. A telerehabilitation approach to delivery of constraint-induced movement therapy. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2006;43(3):391–400. doi: 10.1682/JRRD.2005.02.0042.
    1. Rand D, Givon N, Weingarden H, Nota A, Zeilig G. Eliciting upper extremity purposeful movements using video games: a comparison with traditional therapy for stroke rehabilitation. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2014;28(8):733–739. doi: 10.1177/1545968314521008.
    1. Laver KE, George S, Thomas S, Deutsch JE, Crotty M. Virtual reality for stroke rehabilitation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;12:CD008349.
    1. Brennan DM, Lum P, Uswatte G, Taub E, Gilmore BM, Barman J. A telerehabilitation platform for home-based automated therapy of arm function. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2011;2011:1819–1822.
    1. Hodics TM, Nakatsuka K, Upreti B, Alex A, Smith PS, Pezzullo JC. Wolf Motor function test for characterizing moderate to severe hemiparesis in stroke patients. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2012;93(11):1963–1967. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2012.05.002.
    1. Taub E, Uswatte G, Bowman MH, Mark VW, Delgado A, Bryson C, et al. Constraint-induced movement therapy combined with conventional neurorehabilitation techniques in chronic stroke patients with plegic hands: a case series. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2013;94(1):86–94. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2012.07.029.
    1. Skidmore ER, Holm MB, Whyte EM, Dew MA, Dawson D, Becker JT. The feasibility of meta-cognitive strategy training in acute inpatient stroke rehabilitation: case report. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2011;21(2):208–223. doi: 10.1080/09602011.2011.552559.
    1. Uswatte G, Taub E, Morris D, Light K, Thompson PA. The motor activity log-28: assessing daily use of the hemiparetic arm after stroke. Neurology. 2006;67(7):1189–1194. doi: 10.1212/01.wnl.0000238164.90657.c2.
    1. Whitall J, Savin DN, Jr, Harris-Love M, Waller SM. Psychometric properties of a modified Wolf Motor function test for people with mild and moderate upper-extremity hemiparesis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2006;87(5):656–660. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2006.02.004.
    1. Morris DM, Uswatte G, Crago JE, Cook EW, 3rd, Taub E. The reliability of the wolf motor function test for assessing upper extremity function after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2001;82(6):750–755. doi: 10.1053/apmr.2001.23183.
    1. Wolf SL, Catlin PA, Ellis M, Archer AL, Morgan B, Piacentino A. Assessing wolf motor function test as outcome measure for research in patients after stroke. Stroke. 2001;32(7):1635–1639. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.32.7.1635.
    1. Chen H, Chen CC, Hsueh I, Huang S, Hsieh C. Test-retest reproducibility and smallest real difference of 5 hand function tests in patients with stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2009;23(5):435–440. doi: 10.1177/1545968308331146.
    1. Cella D, Lai JS, Nowinski CJ, Victorson D, Peterman A, Miller D, et al. Neuro-QOL: brief measures of health-related quality of life for clinical research in neurology. Neurology. 2012;78(23):1860–1867. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0b013e318258f744.
    1. Gershon RC, Lai JS, Bode R, Choi S, Moy C, Bleck T, et al. Neuro-QOL: quality of life item banks for adults with neurological disorders: item development and calibrations based upon clinical and general population testing. Qual Life Res. 2012;21(3):475–486. doi: 10.1007/s11136-011-9958-8.
    1. Perez L, Huang J, Jansky L, Nowinski C, Victorson D, Peterman A, et al. Using focus groups to inform the Neuro-QOL measurement tool: exploring patient-centered, health-related quality of life concepts across neurological conditions. J Neurosci Nurs. 2007;39(6):342–353. doi: 10.1097/01376517-200712000-00005.
    1. Dunn W, Griffith JW, Morrison MT, et al. Somatosensation assessment using the NIH toolbox. Neurology. 2013;80(11 Supplement 3):S41–S44. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0b013e3182872c54.
    1. Borstad AL N-LD. The Brief Kinesthesia test is feasible and sensitive: A study in stroke. Braz J Phys Ther. 2016;(In Press).
    1. Hunter JM, Mackin EJ, Callahan AD. Rehabilitation of the Hand: Surgery and Therapy. 4th edition ed: Mosby; 1995.
    1. Novak CB, Mackinnon SE, Williams JI, Kelly L. Establishment of reliability in the evaluation of hand sensibility. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1993;92(2):311–322. doi: 10.1097/00006534-199308000-00017.
    1. Halar E, Hammond M, LaCava E, Camann C, Ward J. Sensory perception threshold measurement: an evaluation of semiobjective testing devices. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1987;68(8):499–507.
    1. Rolke R, Magerl W, Campbell KA, et al. Quantitative sensory testing: a comprehensive protocol for clinical trials. Eur J Pain. 2006;10(1):77. doi: 10.1016/j.ejpain.2005.02.003.
    1. ; Accessed 29 Jan 2017.
    1. Dong Y, Sharma VK, Chan BP, Venketasubramanian N, Teoh HL, Seet RC, et al. The Montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA) is superior to the mini-mental state examination (MMSE) for the detection of vascular cognitive impairment after acute stroke. J Neurol Sci. 2010;299(1):15–8.
    1. Freitas S, Simoes MR, Alves L, Vicente M, Santana I. Montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA): validation study for vascular dementia. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2012;18(6):1031–1040. doi: 10.1017/S135561771200077X.
    1. Webb AJ, Pendlebury ST, Li L, Simoni M, Lovett N, Mehta Z, et al. Validation of the Montreal cognitive assessment versus mini-mental state examination against hypertension and hypertensive arteriopathy after transient ischemic attack or minor stroke. Stroke. 2014;45(11):3337–42.
    1. Taub E, Uswatte G. Constraint-induced movement therapy: a family of neurorehabilitation treatments that harnesses the plasticity of the central nervous system. Neurologie und Rehabil. 2012;19(3):161–175.
    1. Uswatte G, Taub E. Constraint-induced movement therapy: a method for harnessing neuroplasticity to treat motor disorders. Prog Brain Res. 2013;207:379–401. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-444-63327-9.00015-1.
    1. Lin K, Hsieh Y, Wu C, Chen C, Jang Y, Liu J. Minimal detectable change and clinically important difference of the Wolf Motor function test in stroke patients. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2009;23(5):429–434. doi: 10.1177/1545968308331144.
    1. Unanticipated Problems Involving Risks & Adverse Events Guidance . Office for Human research Protections. 2007.
    1. Page SJ, Levine P, Sisto S, Bond Q, Johnston MV. Stroke patients' and therapists' opinions of constraint-induced movement therapy. Clin Rehabil. 2002;16(1):55–60. doi: 10.1191/0269215502cr473oa.

Source: PubMed

Patrocinadores y Colaboradores

Condiciones médicas

Intervenciones de drogas

3
Suscribir