Project description:BackgroundStroke patients are often affected by arm paresis, have functional impairments and receive help from professional or informal caregivers. Progressive resistance training is a common intervention for functional impairments after paresis. Randomised controlled trials (RCT) showed benefits for functional recovery after resistance training. However, there is a lack of evidence for strength training in subacute stroke patients. The aim of this study is to investigate safety and effectiveness of arm strength training in subacute stroke patients.MethodsWe will conduct a prospective, assessor-blinded RCT of people with subacute stroke. We will randomly assign patients to one of two parallel groups in a 1:1 ratio and will use concealed allocation. The intervention group will receive, in addition to standard treatment, high-intensity arm training (three times per week, over three weeks; 60 min each session; with a total of nine additional sessions). The control group will receive, in addition to standard treatment, low-intensity arm training (same quantity, frequency and treatment time as the intervention group). Standard treatment for the affected arm includes mobilisation, stretching, therapeutic positioning, arm and hand motor training, strengthening exercises, mechanical assisted training, functional training and task-oriented training. The primary efficacy endpoint will be grip strength. Secondary outcome measures will be Modified Ashworth Scale, Motricity Index, Fugl-Meyer Assessment for the upper limb, Box and Block Test and Goal Attainment Scale for individual participatory goals. We will measure primary and secondary outcomes with blinded assessors at baseline and immediately after three weeks of additional therapy. Based on our sample size calculation, 78 patients will be recruited from our rehabilitation hospital in two and a half years. Drop-out rates and adverse events will be systematically recorded.DiscussionThis study attempts to close the evidence gap for effects of arm strength training in subacute stroke patients. The results of this trial will provide robust evidence for effects and safety of high-intensity arm training for people with stroke.Trial registrationGerman Clinical Trials Register, DRKS00012484 . Registered on 26 May 2017.
Project description:Background and Purpose: Limited research has been conducted with the aim of understanding which upper extremity movements are difficult for persons with severe chronic stroke. The purpose of this study was to test the structure of the Fugl-Meyer Assessment for Upper Extremity (FMA-UE) using Rasch analysis in persons with chronic stroke with moderate to severe deficits and to determine the item difficulty hierarchy. Methods: This was a secondary analysis of data from previous randomized, controlled trials, or clinical trials. The participants were 101 persons with chronic stroke with moderate to severe hemiparesis (time after onset of stroke, 1375.3 ± 1157.9 days; the 33-item FMA-UE, 31.1 ± 12.8). Principal component analysis and infit statistics were used to evaluate dimensionality. Rasch analysis using a rating scale model was performed, and item difficulty was determined. Results: Six misfit items were removed. The results showed that the 27-item FMA-UE was unidimensional. Rasch analysis showed that the movements performed within synergies were among the easiest items. Shoulder and elbow movements were among the easiest items, whereas forearm and wrist movements were among the moderately to most difficult items. Hand items spanned various difficulty levels. Discussion and Conclusions: The FMA-UE is a valid assessment tool of upper extremity motor function in persons with chronic stroke with moderate to severe deficits. The results showed that item difficulty was consistent with the stepwise recovery course proposed by Fugl-Meyer. The movements that are difficult for patients with moderate to severe chronic paresis were determined, which would enable comparison of each movement using a measure of motion difficulty in future studies.
Project description:ObjectiveStroke is a leading cause of long-term motor disability. Stroke patients with severe hand weakness do not profit from rehabilitative treatments. Recently, brain-controlled robotics and sequential functional electrical stimulation allowed some improvement. However, for such therapies to succeed, it is required to decode patients' intentions for different arm movements. Here, we evaluated whether residual muscle activity could be used to predict movements from paralyzed joints in severely impaired chronic stroke patients.MethodsMuscle activity was recorded with surface-electromyography (EMG) in 41 patients, with severe hand weakness (Fugl-Meyer Assessment [FMA] hand subscores of 2.93 ± 2.7), in order to decode their intention to perform six different motions of the affected arm, required for voluntary muscle activity and to control neuroprostheses. Decoding of paretic and nonparetic muscle activity was performed using a feed-forward neural network classifier. The contribution of each muscle to the intended movement was determined.ResultsDecoding of up to six arm movements was accurate (>65%) in more than 97% of nonparetic and 46% of paretic muscles.InterpretationThese results demonstrate that some level of neuronal innervation to the paretic muscle remains preserved and can be used to implement neurorehabilitative treatments in 46% of patients with severe paralysis and extensive cortical and/or subcortical lesions. Such decoding may allow these patients for the first time after stroke to control different motions of arm prostheses through muscle-triggered rehabilitative treatments.
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:IntroductionStroke-induced upper limb disabilities can be characterized by both motor impairments and activity limitations, commonly assessed using Fugl-Meyer Motor Assessment for Upper Extremity (FMMA-UE) and Action Research Arm Test (ARAT), respectively. The relationship between the two assessments during recovery is largely unstudied. Expectedly they diverge over time when recovery of impairment (restitution) plateaus, but compensation-driven improvements still occur. The objective of this study is to evaluate the alignment between FMMA-UE and ARAT in defining upper limb functional recovery categories by ARAT scores. We aimed to establish cut-off scores for both measures from the acute/early subacute, subacute and chronic stages of stroke recovery.MethodsSecondary analysis of four prospective cohort studies (acute/early subacute: n = 133, subacute: n = 113, chronic: n = 92) stages post-stroke. Receiver operating characteristic curves calculated the area under the curve (AUC) to establish optimal FMMA-UE cut-offs based on predefined ARAT thresholds distinguishing five activity levels from no activity to full activity. Weighted kappa was used to determine agreement between the two assessments. We used minimally clinically important difference (MCID) and minimal detectable change (MDC95) for comparison.ResultsFMMA-UE and ARAT scores showed no relevant divergence across all recovery stages. Results indicated similar cut-off scores in all recovery stages with variability below MCID and MDC95 levels. Cut-off scores demonstrated robust AUC values from 0.77 to 0.86 at every recovery stage. Only in highly functional patients at the chronic stage, we found a reduced specificity of 0.55. At all other times sensitivity ranged between 0.68 and 0.99 and specificity between 0.71 and 0.99. Weighted kappa at the acute/early subacute, subacute and chronic stages was 0.76, 0.83, and 0.81, respectively.DiscussionOur research shows a strong alignment between FMMA-UE and ARAT cut-off scores throughout stroke recovery, except among the subgroup of highly recovered patients at the chronic stage. Discrepancies in specificity potentially stem from fine motor deficits affecting dexterity outcomes that are not captured by FMMA-UE. Additionally, the high congruence of both measures suggests they are not suited to distinguish between restitution and compensation. Calling for more comprehensive assessment methods to better understand upper limb functionality in rehabilitation.
Project description:End-effector (EE) and exoskeleton (Exo) robots have not been directly compared previously. The present study aimed to directly compare EE and Exo robots in chronic stroke patients with moderate-to-severe upper limb impairment. This single-blinded, randomised controlled trial included 38 patients with stroke who were admitted to the rehabilitation hospital. The patients were equally divided into EE and Exo groups. Baseline characteristics, including sex, age, stroke type, brain lesion side (left/right), stroke duration, Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA)-Upper Extremity score, and Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT) score, were assessed. Additionally, impairment level (FMA, motor status score), activity (WMFT), and participation (stroke impact scale [SIS]) were evaluated. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics between the groups. After the intervention, improvements were significantly better in the EE group with regard to activity and participation (WMFT-Functional ability rating scale, WMFT-Time, and SIS-Participation). There was no intervention-related adverse event. The EE robot intervention is better than the Exo robot intervention with regard to activity and participation among chronic stroke patients with moderate-to-severe upper limb impairment. Further research is needed to confirm this novel finding.
Project description:Background The ability to predict outcome after stroke is clinically important for planning treatment and for stratification in restorative clinical trials. In relation to the upper limbs, the main predictor of outcome is initial severity, with patients who present with mild to moderate impairment regaining about 70% of their initial impairment by 3 months post-stroke. However, in those with severe presentations, this proportional recovery applies in only about half, with the other half experiencing poor recovery. The reasons for this failure to recover are not established although the extent of corticospinal tract damage is suggested to be a contributory factor. In this study, we investigated 30 patients with chronic stroke who had presented with severe upper limb impairment and asked whether it was possible to differentiate those with a subsequent good or poor recovery of the upper limb based solely on a T1-weighted structural brain scan. Methods A support vector machine approach using voxel-wise lesion likelihood values was used to show that it was possible to classify patients as good or poor recoverers with variable accuracy depending on which brain regions were used to perform the classification. Results While considering damage within a corticospinal tract mask resulted in 73% classification accuracy, using other (non-corticospinal tract) motor areas provided 87% accuracy, and combining both resulted in 90% accuracy. Conclusion This proof of concept approach highlights the relative importance of different anatomical structures in supporting post-stroke upper limb motor recovery and points towards methodologies that might be used to stratify patients in future restorative clinical trials.
Project description:Upper limb motor deficits in severe stroke survivors often remain unresolved over extended time periods. Novel neurotechnologies have the potential to significantly support upper limb motor restoration in severely impaired stroke individuals. Here, we review recent controlled clinical studies and reviews focusing on the mechanisms of action and effectiveness of single and combined technology-aided interventions for upper limb motor rehabilitation after stroke, including robotics, muscular electrical stimulation, brain stimulation and brain computer/machine interfaces. We aim at identifying possible guidance for the optimal use of these new technologies to enhance upper limb motor recovery especially in severe chronic stroke patients. We found that the current literature does not provide enough evidence to support strict guidelines, because of the variability of the procedures for each intervention and of the heterogeneity of the stroke population. The present results confirm that neurotechnology-aided upper limb rehabilitation is promising for severe chronic stroke patients, but the combination of interventions often lacks understanding of single intervention mechanisms of action, which may not reflect the summation of single intervention's effectiveness. Stroke rehabilitation is a long and complex process, and one single intervention administrated in a short time interval cannot have a large impact for motor recovery, especially in severely impaired patients. To design personalized interventions combining or proposing different interventions in sequence, it is necessary to have an excellent understanding of the mechanisms determining the effectiveness of a single treatment in this heterogeneous population of stroke patients. We encourage the identification of objective biomarkers for stroke recovery for patients' stratification and to tailor treatments. Furthermore, the advantage of longitudinal personalized trial designs compared to classical double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trials as the basis for precise personalized stroke rehabilitation medicine is discussed. Finally, we also promote the necessary conceptual change from 'one-suits-all' treatments within in-patient clinical rehabilitation set-ups towards personalized home-based treatment strategies, by adopting novel technologies merging rehabilitation and motor assistance, including implantable ones.
Project description:IntroductionRepetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is an evidence-based treatment widely recommended to promote hand motor recovery after ischaemic stroke. However, the therapeutic efficacy of rTMS over the motor cortex in stroke patients is currently restricted and heterogeneous. This study aimed to determine whether excitatory rTMS over the contralesional dorsal premotor cortex (cPMd) facilitates the functional recovery of the upper limbs during the postacute stage of severe ischaemic stroke.Methods and analysisThis study will be conducted as a single-blind, controlled, randomised study, in which 44 patients with poststroke hemiplegia with a course of disease ranging from 1 week to 3 months and Fugl-Meyer upper limb score ≤22 will be enrolled. The study participants will be randomly assigned to groups A (n=22) and B (n=22). The two groups are based on routine rehabilitation training and drug treatment; group A will be treated with low-frequency (1 Hz) rTMS over the contralesional primary motor cortex (cM1), and group B will be treated with high-frequency (10 Hz) rTMS over cPMd. For 2 weeks, rTMS will be administered once a day, 5 days a week. The primary outcome is the Fugl-Meyer assessment of the upper limb. The secondary outcomes include the Arm Subscore of the Motricity Index, Hong Kong edition of Functional Test for the Hemiplegic Upper Extremity, Modified Barthel Index and Modified Ashworth Scale score of the paralysed pectoralis major and biceps brachii. Furthermore, data of diffusion tensor imaging and functional MRI will be collected. These outcomes will be assessed before and after the completion of the intervention.Ethics and disseminationThis study has been approved by the Ethics Committee of the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University (2020 SR-266). The findings of this study will be spread through networks of scientists, professionals and the general public as well as peer-reviewed scientific papers and presentations at pertinent conferences.Trial registration numberChiCTR2000038049.
Project description:Background. Spontaneous recovery early after stroke is most evident during a time-sensitive window of heightened neuroplasticity, known as spontaneous neurobiological recovery. It is unknown whether poststroke upper-limb motor and somatosensory impairment both reflect spontaneous neurobiological recovery or if somatosensory impairment and/or recovery influences motor recovery. Methods. Motor (Fugl-Meyer upper-extremity [FM-UE]) and somatosensory impairments (Erasmus modification of the Nottingham Sensory Assessment [EmNSA-UE]) were measured in 215 patients within 3 weeks and at 5, 12, and 26 weeks after a first-ever ischemic stroke. The longitudinal association between FM-UE and EmNSA-UE was examined in patients with motor and somatosensory impairments (FM-UE ? 60 and EmNSA-UE ? 37) at baseline. Results. A total of 94 patients were included in the longitudinal analysis. EmNSA-UE increased significantly up to 12 weeks poststroke. The longitudinal association between motor and somatosensory impairment disappeared when correcting for progress of time and was not significantly different for patients with severe baseline somatosensory impairment. Patients with a FM-UE score ?18 at 26 weeks (n = 55) showed a significant positive association between motor and somatosensory impairments, irrespective of progress of time. Conclusions. Progress of time, as a reflection of spontaneous neurobiological recovery, is an important factor that drives recovery of upper-limb motor as well as somatosensory impairments in the first 12 weeks poststroke. Severe somatosensory impairment at baseline does not directly compromise motor recovery. The study rather suggests that spontaneous recovery of somatosensory impairment is a prerequisite for full motor recovery of the upper paretic limb.