Dataset Information

A randomized controlled trial on the effects induced by robot-assisted and usual-care rehabilitation on upper limb muscle synergies in post-stroke subjects.

ABSTRACT: Muscle synergies are hypothesized to reflect connections among motoneurons in the spinal cord activated by central commands and sensory feedback. Robotic rehabilitation of upper limb in post-stroke subjects has shown promising results in terms of improvement of arm function and motor control achieved by reassembling muscle synergies into a set more similar to that of healthy people. However, in stroke survivors the potentially neurophysiological changes induced by robot-mediated learning versus usual care have not yet been investigated. We quantified upper limb motor deficits and the changes induced by rehabilitation in 32 post-stroke subjects through the movement analysis of two virtual untrained tasks of object placing and pronation. The sample analyzed in this study is part of a larger bi-center study and included all subjects who underwent kinematic analysis and were randomized into robot and usual care groups. Post-stroke subjects who followed robotic rehabilitation showed larger improvements in axial-to-proximal muscle synergies with respect to those who underwent usual care. This was associated to a significant improvement of the proximal kinematics. Both treatments had negative effects in muscle synergies controlling the distal district. This study supports the definition of new rehabilitative treatments for improving the neurophysiological recovery after stroke.

SUBMITTER: Lencioni T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7935882 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A randomized controlled trial on the effects induced by robot-assisted and usual-care rehabilitation on upper limb muscle synergies in post-stroke subjects.

Lencioni T T Fornia L L Bowman T T Marzegan A A Caronni A A Turolla A A Jonsdottir J J Carpinella I I Ferrarin M M

Scientific reports 20210305 1

Muscle synergies are hypothesized to reflect connections among motoneurons in the spinal cord activated by central commands and sensory feedback. Robotic rehabilitation of upper limb in post-stroke subjects has shown promising results in terms of improvement of arm function and motor control achieved by reassembling muscle synergies into a set more similar to that of healthy people. However, in stroke survivors the potentially neurophysiological changes induced by robot-mediated learning versus ...[more]

PMID: 33674675

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIntensive robot-assisted training of the upper limb after stroke can reduce motor impairment, even at the chronic stage. However, the effectiveness of practice for recovery depends on the selection of the practised movements. We hypothesized that rehabilitation can be optimized by selecting the movements to be practiced based on the trainee's performance profile.MethodsWe present a novel principle ('steepest gradients') for performance-based selection of movements. The principle is based on mapping motor performance across a workspace and then selecting movements located at regions of the steepest transition between better and worse performance. To assess the benefit of this principle we compared the effect of 15 sessions of robot-assisted reaching training on upper-limb motor impairment, between two groups of people who have moderate-to-severe chronic upper-limb hemiparesis due to stroke. The test group (N = 7) received steepest gradients-based training, iteratively selected according to the steepest gradients principle with weekly remapping, whereas the control group (N = 9) received a standard "centre-out" reaching training. Training intensity was identical.ResultsBoth groups showed improvement in Fugl-Meyer upper-extremity scores (the primary outcome measure). Moreover, the test group showed significantly greater improvement (twofold) compared to control. The score remained elevated, on average, for at least 4 weeks although the additional benefit of the steepest-gradients -based training diminished relative to control.ConclusionsThis study provides a proof of concept for the superior benefit of performance-based selection of practiced movements in reducing upper-limb motor impairment due to stroke. This added benefit was most evident in the short term, suggesting that performance-based steepest-gradients training may be effective in increasing the rate of initial phase of practice-based recovery; we discuss how long-term retention may also be improved.Trial registrationISRCTN, ISRCTN65226825 , registered 12 June 2018 - Retrospectively registered.

Project description:BackgroundEffective rehabilitative therapies are needed for patients with long-term deficits after stroke.MethodsIn this multicenter, randomized, controlled trial involving 127 patients with moderate-to-severe upper-limb impairment 6 months or more after a stroke, we randomly assigned 49 patients to receive intensive robot-assisted therapy, 50 to receive intensive comparison therapy, and 28 to receive usual care. Therapy consisted of 36 1-hour sessions over a period of 12 weeks. The primary outcome was a change in motor function, as measured on the Fugl-Meyer Assessment of Sensorimotor Recovery after Stroke, at 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes were scores on the Wolf Motor Function Test and the Stroke Impact Scale. Secondary analyses assessed the treatment effect at 36 weeks.ResultsAt 12 weeks, the mean Fugl-Meyer score for patients receiving robot-assisted therapy was better than that for patients receiving usual care (difference, 2.17 points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.23 to 4.58) and worse than that for patients receiving intensive comparison therapy (difference, -0.14 points; 95% CI, -2.94 to 2.65), but the differences were not significant. The results on the Stroke Impact Scale were significantly better for patients receiving robot-assisted therapy than for those receiving usual care (difference, 7.64 points; 95% CI, 2.03 to 13.24). No other treatment comparisons were significant at 12 weeks. Secondary analyses showed that at 36 weeks, robot-assisted therapy significantly improved the Fugl-Meyer score (difference, 2.88 points; 95% CI, 0.57 to 5.18) and the time on the Wolf Motor Function Test (difference, -8.10 seconds; 95% CI, -13.61 to -2.60) as compared with usual care but not with intensive therapy. No serious adverse events were reported.ConclusionsIn patients with long-term upper-limb deficits after stroke, robot-assisted therapy did not significantly improve motor function at 12 weeks, as compared with usual care or intensive therapy. In secondary analyses, robot-assisted therapy improved outcomes over 36 weeks as compared with usual care but not with intensive therapy. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00372411.)

Project description:BackgroundLoss of arm function is a common problem after stroke. Robot-assisted training might improve arm function and activities of daily living. We compared the clinical effectiveness of robot-assisted training using the MIT-Manus robotic gym with an enhanced upper limb therapy (EULT) programme based on repetitive functional task practice and with usual care.MethodsRATULS was a pragmatic, multicentre, randomised controlled trial done at four UK centres. Stroke patients aged at least 18 years with moderate or severe upper limb functional limitation, between 1 week and 5 years after their first stroke, were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive robot-assisted training, EULT, or usual care. Robot-assisted training and EULT were provided for 45 min, three times per week for 12 weeks. Randomisation was internet-based using permuted block sequences. Treatment allocation was masked from outcome assessors but not from participants or therapists. The primary outcome was upper limb function success (defined using the Action Research Arm Test [ARAT]) at 3 months. Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. This study is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN69371850.FindingsBetween April 14, 2014, and April 30, 2018, 770 participants were enrolled and randomly assigned to either robot-assisted training (n=257), EULT (n=259), or usual care (n=254). The primary outcome of ARAT success was achieved by 103 (44%) of 232 patients in the robot-assisted training group, 118 (50%) of 234 in the EULT group, and 85 (42%) of 203 in the usual care group. Compared with usual care, robot-assisted training (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1·17 [98·3% CI 0·70-1·96]) and EULT (aOR 1·51 [0·90-2·51]) did not improve upper limb function; the effects of robot-assisted training did not differ from EULT (aOR 0·78 [0·48-1·27]). More participants in the robot-assisted training group (39 [15%] of 257) and EULT group (33 [13%] of 259) had serious adverse events than in the usual care group (20 [8%] of 254), but none were attributable to the intervention.InterpretationRobot-assisted training and EULT did not improve upper limb function after stroke compared with usual care for patients with moderate or severe upper limb functional limitation. These results do not support the use of robot-assisted training as provided in this trial in routine clinical practice.FundingNational Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme.

Project description:BackgroundAction observation (AO) is a physical rehabilitation approach that facilitates the occurrence of neural plasticity through the activation of the mirror-neural system, promoting motor recovery in people with stroke.ObjectivesTo assess whether AO enhances upper limb motor function in people with stroke.Search methodsWe searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched 18 May 2021), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (18 May 2021), MEDLINE (1946 to 18 May 2021), Embase (1974 to 18 May 2021), and five additional databases. We also searched trial registries and reference lists.Selection criteriaRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) of AO alone or associated with physical practice in adults after stroke. The primary outcome was upper limb (arm and hand) motor function. Secondary outcomes included dependence on activities of daily living (ADL), motor performance, cortical activation, quality of life, and adverse effects.Data collection and analysisTwo review authors independently selected trials according to the predefined inclusion criteria, extracted data, assessed risk of bias using RoB 1, and applied the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence. The reviews authors contacted trial authors for clarification and missing information.Main resultsWe included 16 trials involving 574 individuals. Most trials provided AO followed by the practice of motor actions. Training varied between 1 day and 8 weeks of therapy, 10 to 90 minutes per session. The time of AO ranged from 1 minute to 10 minutes for each motor action, task or movement observed. The total number of motor actions ranged from 1 to 3. Control comparisons included sham observation, physical therapy, and functional activity practice.Primary outcomesAO improved arm function (standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.39, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.17 to 0.61; 11 trials, 373 participants; low-certainty evidence); and improved hand function (mean difference (MD) 2.76, 95% CI 1.04 to 4.49; 5 trials, 178 participants; low-certainty evidence).Secondary outcomesAO did not improve ADL performance (SMD 0.37, 95% CI -0.34 to 1.08; 7 trials, 302 participants; very low-certainty evidence), or quality of life (MD 5.52, 95% CI -30.74 to 41.78; 2 trials, 30 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We were unable to pool the other secondary outcomes (motor performance and cortical activation). Only two trials reported adverse events without significant adverse effects.Authors' conclusionsThe effects of AO are small for arm function compared to any control group; for hand function the effects are large, but not clinically significant. For both, the certainty of evidence is low. There is no evidence of benefit or detriment from AO on ADL and quality of life of people with stroke; however, the certainty of evidence is very low. As such, our confidence in the effect estimate is limited because it will likely change with future research.

Project description:BackgroundThe efficacy of upper limb (UL) robot-assisted therapy (RAT) on functional improvement after stroke remains unclear. However, recently published randomized controlled trials have supported its potential benefits in enhancing the activities of daily living, arm and hand function, and muscle strength. Task-specific and high-intensity exercises are key points in facilitating motor re-learning in neurorehabilitation since RAT can provide an assisted-as-needed approach. This study aims to investigate the clinical effects of an exoskeleton robotic system for UL rehabilitation compared with conventional therapy (CT) in people with subacute stroke. As a secondary aim, we seek to identify patients' characteristics, which can predict better recovery after UL-RAT and detects whether it could elicit greater brain stimulation.MethodsA total of 84 subacute stroke patients will be recruited from 7 Italian rehabilitation centers over 3 years. The patients will be randomly allocated to either CT (control group, CG) or CT plus UL-RT through an Armeo®Power (Hocoma AG, CH, Volketswil, Switzerland) exoskeleton (experimental group, EG). A sample stratification based on distance since onset, DSO (DSO ≤ 30; DSO > 30), and Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FM)-UL (FM-UL ≤ 22; 22 < FM-UL ≤ 44) will be considered for the randomization. The outcomes will be recorded at baseline (T0), after 25 + 3 sessions of intervention (T1), and at 6 months post-stroke (T2). The motor functioning assessed by the FM-UL (0-66) will be considered the primary outcome. The clinical assessments will be set based on the International Classification of Function, Disability and Health (ICF). A patient satisfaction questionnaire will be evaluated in the EG at T1. A subgroup of patients will be evaluated at T0 and T1 via electroencephalography. Their brain electrical activity will be recorded during rest conditions with their eyes closed and open (5 min each).ConclusionThe results of this trial will provide an in-depth understanding of the efficacy of early UL-RAT through a whole arm exoskeleton and how it may relate to the neural plasticity process. The trial was registered at ClinicalTrial.gov with the registration identifier NCT04697368.

Dataset Information

A randomized controlled trial on the effects induced by robot-assisted and usual-care rehabilitation on upper limb muscle synergies in post-stroke subjects.

Publications

A randomized controlled trial on the effects induced by robot-assisted and usual-care rehabilitation on upper limb muscle synergies in post-stroke subjects.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets