Deficit Fields for Stroke Recovery
8 juni 2021 bijgewerkt door: James Patton, Shirley Ryan AbilityLab
Error-enhanced Learning & Recovery in 2 & 3 Dimensions
This study investigates the potential of customized robotic and visual feedback interaction to improve recovery of movements in stroke survivors.
While therapists widely recognize that customization is critical to recovery, little is understood about how take advantage of statistical analysis tools to aid in the process of designing individualized training.
Our approach first creates a model of a person's own unique movement deficits, and then creates a practice environment to correct these problems.
Experiments will determine how the deficit-field approach can improve (1) reaching accuracy, (2) range of motion, and (3) activities of daily living.
The findings will not only shed light on how to improve therapy for stroke survivors, it will test hypotheses about fundamental processes of practice and learning.
This study will help us move closer to our long-term goal of clinically effective treatments using interactive devices.
Studie Overzicht
Toestand
Voltooid
Conditie
Studietype
Ingrijpend
Inschrijving (Werkelijk)
45
Fase
- Niet toepasbaar
Contacten en locaties
In dit gedeelte vindt u de contactgegevens van degenen die het onderzoek uitvoeren en informatie over waar dit onderzoek wordt uitgevoerd.
Studie Locaties
-
-
Illinois
-
Chicago, Illinois, Verenigde Staten, 60611
- Rehabilitation Institute of Chicago
-
-
Deelname Criteria
Onderzoekers zoeken naar mensen die aan een bepaalde beschrijving voldoen, de zogenaamde geschiktheidscriteria. Enkele voorbeelden van deze criteria zijn iemands algemene gezondheidstoestand of eerdere behandelingen.
Geschiktheidscriteria
Leeftijden die in aanmerking komen voor studie
18 jaar tot 100 jaar (Volwassen, Oudere volwassene)
Accepteert gezonde vrijwilligers
Ja
Geslachten die in aanmerking komen voor studie
Allemaal
Beschrijving
Inclusion Criteria:
STROKE SURVIVORS:
- adult (age >18)
- Chronic stage stroke recovery (8+ months post)
- available medical records and radiographic information about lesion locations
- strokes caused by an ischemic infarct in the middle cerebral artery
- primary motor cortex involvement
- a Fugl-Meyer score (between 15-50) to evaluate arm motor impairment level
HEALTHY CONTROL PARTICIPANTS:
- adult (age >18)
- healthy individuals with no history of stroke or neural injury
Exclusion Criteria:
- bilateral paresis;
- severe sensory deficits in the limb
- severe spasticity (Modified Ashworth of 4) preventing movement
- aphasia, cognitive impairment or affective dysfunction that would influence the ability to perform the experiment
- inability to provide an informed consent
- severe current medical problems
- diffuse/multiple lesion sites or multiple stroke events
- hemispatial neglect or visual field cut that would prevent subjects from seeing the targets.
Studie plan
Dit gedeelte bevat details van het studieplan, inclusief hoe de studie is opgezet en wat de studie meet.
Hoe is de studie opgezet?
Ontwerpdetails
- Primair doel: Behandeling
- Toewijzing: Gerandomiseerd
- Interventioneel model: Parallelle opdracht
- Masker: Dubbele
Wapens en interventies
Deelnemersgroep / Arm |
Interventie / Behandeling |
|---|---|
|
Experimenteel: Deficit-fields to reduce error
We hypothesize that a deficit-field design, using the statistics of a patient's errors to customize training, will provide optimal augmentation that varies during motion as needed.
We will compare the training effects of error deficit-fields with previous methods of error augmentation to improve reaching ability.
|
Stroke survivors exhibit error in both reaching extent and abnormal curvatures of motion.
Prior error augmentation techniques multiply error by a constant at each instant during movement.
However, magnification of spurious errors may provoke over-compensation.
We hypothesize that a deficit-field design, using the statistics of a patient's errors to customize training, will provide optimal augmentation that varies during motion as needed.
We will compare the training effects of error deficit-fields with previous methods of error augmentation to improve reaching ability.
|
|
Experimenteel: Deficit-fields to expand range of motion
Amplifying augmentation can expand motor exploration and improve skill retention in patients.
Using motor exploration patterns from each patient, we will form customized deficit-fields to recover normal joint workspace.
We will compare augmentation training that either amplifies or diminishes the observed deficits (Expt-1).
We also compare deficit-fields with our prior augmentation methods to determine the added value of increased customization (Expt-2).
|
Motor deficits manifest in the workspace limitations of joints, i.e. reduced range of motion, uneven extension-flexion, inter-joint coupling, and unwanted synergies.
Our work builds upon these ideas by augmenting self-directed movement for training coordination.
We found that amplifying augmentation can expand motor exploration and improve skill retention in patients.
Using motor exploration patterns from each patient, we will form customized deficit-fields to recover normal joint workspace.
We will compare augmentation training that either amplifies or diminishes the observed deficits (Expt-1).
We also compare deficit-fields with our prior augmentation methods to determine the added value of increased customization (Expt-2).
|
|
Experimenteel: Deficit-fields to improve function
Here we present visual distortion of whole body movement during manual tasks during standing, including reaching, grasping, and object manipulation.
We compare the training effects of feedback based on deficit-fields versus practice with normal vision.
|
Clinicians have recognized the benefits of training on everyday tasks (Hubbard, Parsons et al. 2009), as well as practice with whole-body actions (Boehme 1988; Bohannon 1995).
However, typical robotic systems have only a single contact point and cannot drive the multiple joints involved in functional tasks.
Visual distortions (e.g. a shift, rotation or stretch) can promote adaptation even without forces.
Here we present visual distortion of whole body movement during manual tasks during standing, including reaching, grasping, and object manipulation.
We compare the training effects of feedback based on deficit-fields versus practice with normal vision.
|
Wat meet het onderzoek?
Primaire uitkomstmaten
Uitkomstmaat |
Maatregel Beschrijving |
Tijdsspanne |
|---|---|---|
|
Arm motor recovery scores on the Fugl-Meyer
Tijdsspanne: Baseline at beginning of week 1 and 3 prior to intervention; post-evaluation at end of week 4; follow-up evaluation at end of week 5
|
Change from baseline in arm motor recovery as measured by Fugl-Meyer
|
Baseline at beginning of week 1 and 3 prior to intervention; post-evaluation at end of week 4; follow-up evaluation at end of week 5
|
Secundaire uitkomstmaten
Uitkomstmaat |
Maatregel Beschrijving |
Tijdsspanne |
|---|---|---|
|
Number of blocks transferred in Box and Blocks Test
Tijdsspanne: Baseline at beginning of week 1 and 3 prior to intervention; post-evaluation at end of week 4; follow-up evaluation at end of week 5
|
Change from baseline in number of blocks transferred during Box and Blocks Test
|
Baseline at beginning of week 1 and 3 prior to intervention; post-evaluation at end of week 4; follow-up evaluation at end of week 5
|
|
Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS)
Tijdsspanne: Baseline at beginning of week 1 and 3 prior to intervention; post-evaluation at end of week 4; follow-up evaluation at end of week 5
|
Change from baseline in amount of spasticity in elbow flexors and extensors
|
Baseline at beginning of week 1 and 3 prior to intervention; post-evaluation at end of week 4; follow-up evaluation at end of week 5
|
|
Elbow active range of motion (ROM)
Tijdsspanne: Baseline at beginning of week 1 and 3 prior to intervention; post-evaluation at end of week 4; follow-up evaluation at end of week 5
|
Change from baseline measured in degrees for elbow flexion and extension
|
Baseline at beginning of week 1 and 3 prior to intervention; post-evaluation at end of week 4; follow-up evaluation at end of week 5
|
|
Chedoke McMaster Stroke Assessment for Hand
Tijdsspanne: Baseline at beginning of week 1 and 3 prior to intervention; post-evaluation at end of week 4; follow-up evaluation at end of week 5
|
Change in baseline in amount of hand motor recovery as measured by Chedoke scale
|
Baseline at beginning of week 1 and 3 prior to intervention; post-evaluation at end of week 4; follow-up evaluation at end of week 5
|
|
Time and completion score for Action Research Arm Test (ARAT)
Tijdsspanne: Baseline at beginning of week 1 and 3 prior to intervention; post-evaluation at end of week 4; follow-up evaluation at end of week 5
|
Change in baseline score and time for completion of functional measures as part of ARAT
|
Baseline at beginning of week 1 and 3 prior to intervention; post-evaluation at end of week 4; follow-up evaluation at end of week 5
|
Medewerkers en onderzoekers
Hier vindt u mensen en organisaties die betrokken zijn bij dit onderzoek.
Sponsor
Medewerkers
Onderzoekers
- Hoofdonderzoeker: James L Patton, PhD, Shirley Ryan AbilityLab
Publicaties en nuttige links
De persoon die verantwoordelijk is voor het invoeren van informatie over het onderzoek stelt deze publicaties vrijwillig ter beschikking. Dit kan gaan over alles wat met het onderzoek te maken heeft.
Studie record data
Deze datums volgen de voortgang van het onderzoeksdossier en de samenvatting van de ingediende resultaten bij ClinicalTrials.gov. Studieverslagen en gerapporteerde resultaten worden beoordeeld door de National Library of Medicine (NLM) om er zeker van te zijn dat ze voldoen aan specifieke kwaliteitscontrolenormen voordat ze op de openbare website worden geplaatst.
Bestudeer belangrijke data
Studie start (Werkelijk)
1 mei 2013
Primaire voltooiing (Werkelijk)
30 juni 2019
Studie voltooiing (Werkelijk)
30 juni 2019
Studieregistratiedata
Eerst ingediend
1 oktober 2015
Eerst ingediend dat voldeed aan de QC-criteria
6 oktober 2015
Eerst geplaatst (Schatting)
7 oktober 2015
Updates van studierecords
Laatste update geplaatst (Werkelijk)
10 juni 2021
Laatste update ingediend die voldeed aan QC-criteria
8 juni 2021
Laatst geverifieerd
1 oktober 2018
Meer informatie
Termen gerelateerd aan deze studie
Trefwoorden
Aanvullende relevante MeSH-voorwaarden
Andere studie-ID-nummers
- RehabilitationIC
- 2R01NS053606-05A1 (Subsidie/contract van de Amerikaanse NIH)
Deze informatie is zonder wijzigingen rechtstreeks van de website clinicaltrials.gov gehaald. Als u verzoeken heeft om uw onderzoeksgegevens te wijzigen, te verwijderen of bij te werken, neem dan contact op met register@clinicaltrials.gov. Zodra er een wijziging wordt doorgevoerd op clinicaltrials.gov, wordt deze ook automatisch bijgewerkt op onze website .