Questa pagina è stata tradotta automaticamente e l'accuratezza della traduzione non è garantita. Si prega di fare riferimento al Versione inglese per un testo di partenza.

Discrete Versus Rhythmic Gait Training

2 maggio 2017 aggiornato da: 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.

Panoramica dello studio

Descrizione dettagliata

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 di studio

Interventistico

Iscrizione (Effettivo)

20

Fase

  • Non applicabile

Contatti e Sedi

Questa sezione fornisce i recapiti di coloro che conducono lo studio e informazioni su dove viene condotto lo studio.

Luoghi di studio

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

Criteri di partecipazione

I ricercatori cercano persone che corrispondano a una certa descrizione, chiamata criteri di ammissibilità. Alcuni esempi di questi criteri sono le condizioni generali di salute di una persona o trattamenti precedenti.

Criteri di ammissibilità

Età idonea allo studio

18 anni e precedenti (Adulto, Adulto più anziano)

Accetta volontari sani

No

Sessi ammissibili allo studio

Tutto

Descrizione

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.

Piano di studio

Questa sezione fornisce i dettagli del piano di studio, compreso il modo in cui lo studio è progettato e ciò che lo studio sta misurando.

Come è strutturato lo studio?

Dettagli di progettazione

  • Scopo principale: Trattamento
  • Assegnazione: Randomizzato
  • Modello interventistico: Assegnazione parallela
  • Mascheramento: Triplicare

Armi e interventi

Gruppo di partecipanti / Arm
Intervento / Trattamento
Sperimentale: 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.
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.
Sperimentale: 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.
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

Cosa sta misurando lo studio?

Misure di risultato primarie

Misura del risultato
Misura Descrizione
Lasso di tempo
Functional Ambulation Scale (FAC)
Lasso di tempo: 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

Misure di risultato secondarie

Misura del risultato
Misura Descrizione
Lasso di tempo
Six-minute Walking Test (6MWT)
Lasso di tempo: 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)
Lasso di tempo: 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)
Lasso di tempo: 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
Lasso di tempo: 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
Lasso di tempo: 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

Collaboratori e investigatori

Qui è dove troverai le persone e le organizzazioni coinvolte in questo studio.

Investigatori

  • Cattedra di studio: Daniel G Goroso, Doctor, University of Sao Paulo
  • Cattedra di studio: Lumy Sawaki, PhD, University of Kentucky

Studiare le date dei record

Queste date tengono traccia dell'avanzamento della registrazione dello studio e dell'invio dei risultati di sintesi a ClinicalTrials.gov. I record degli studi e i risultati riportati vengono esaminati dalla National Library of Medicine (NLM) per assicurarsi che soddisfino specifici standard di controllo della qualità prima di essere pubblicati sul sito Web pubblico.

Studia le date principali

Inizio studio

1 novembre 2014

Completamento primario (Effettivo)

1 marzo 2016

Completamento dello studio (Effettivo)

1 settembre 2016

Date di iscrizione allo studio

Primo inviato

5 gennaio 2016

Primo inviato che soddisfa i criteri di controllo qualità

6 gennaio 2016

Primo Inserito (Stima)

8 gennaio 2016

Aggiornamenti dei record di studio

Ultimo aggiornamento pubblicato (Effettivo)

18 settembre 2017

Ultimo aggiornamento inviato che soddisfa i criteri QC

2 maggio 2017

Ultimo verificato

1 maggio 2017

Maggiori informazioni

Termini relativi a questo studio

Piano per i dati dei singoli partecipanti (IPD)

Hai intenzione di condividere i dati dei singoli partecipanti (IPD)?

INDECISO

Queste informazioni sono state recuperate direttamente dal sito web clinicaltrials.gov senza alcuna modifica. In caso di richieste di modifica, rimozione o aggiornamento dei dettagli dello studio, contattare register@clinicaltrials.gov. Non appena verrà implementata una modifica su clinicaltrials.gov, questa verrà aggiornata automaticamente anche sul nostro sito web .

Prove cliniche su Novel Protocol

3
Sottoscrivi