Quantification of Upper Limb Motor Recovery and EEG Power Changes after Robot-Assisted Bilateral Arm Training in Chronic Stroke Patients: A Prospective Pilot Study.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Gandolfi M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5892248 | biostudies-other | 2018
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Publications
Quantification of Upper Limb Motor Recovery and EEG Power Changes after Robot-Assisted Bilateral Arm Training in Chronic Stroke Patients: A Prospective Pilot Study.
Gandolfi Marialuisa M Formaggio Emanuela E Geroin Christian C Storti Silvia Francesca SF Boscolo Galazzo Ilaria I Bortolami Marta M Saltuari Leopold L Picelli Alessandro A Waldner Andreas A Manganotti Paolo P Smania Nicola N
Neural plasticity 20180326
<h4>Background</h4>Bilateral arm training (BAT) has shown promise in expediting progress toward upper limb recovery in chronic stroke patients, but its neural correlates are poorly understood.<h4>Objective</h4>To evaluate changes in upper limb function and EEG power after a robot-assisted BAT in chronic stroke patients.<h4>Methods</h4>In a within-subject design, seven right-handed chronic stroke patients with upper limb paresis received 21 sessions (3 days/week) of the robot-assisted BAT. The ou ...[more]
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.
| S-EPMC6425657 | biostudies-literature
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.)
| S-EPMC5592692 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundStroke is becoming more and more a disease of chronically disabled patients, and new approaches are needed for better outcomes. An intervention based on robot fully assisted upper-limb functional movements is presented.ObjectivesTo test the immediate and sustained effects of the intervention in reducing impairment in chronic stroke and to preliminarily verify the effects on activity.MethodologyNineteen patients with mild-to-severe impairment underwent 12 40-min rehabilitation sessions, 3 per week, of robot-assisted reaching and hand-to-mouth movements. The primary outcome measure was the Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA) at T1, immediately after treatment (n = 19), and at T2, at a 6-month follow-up (n = 10). A subgroup of 11 patients was also administered the Wolf Motor Function Test Time (WMFT TIME) and Functional Ability Scale (WMFT FAS) and Motor Activity Log (MAL) Amount Of Use (AOU), and Quality Of Movement (QOM).ResultsAll patients were compliant with the treatment. There was improvement on the FMA with a mean difference with respect to the baseline of 6.2 points at T1, after intervention (n = 19, 95% CI = 4.6-7.8, p < 0.0002), and 5.9 points at T2 (n = 10, 95% CI = 3.6-8.2, p < 0.005). Significant improvements were found at T1 on the WMFT FAS (n = 11, +0.3/5 points, 95% CI = 0.2-0.4, p < 0.004), on the MAL AOU (n = 11, +0.18/5, 95% CI = 0.07-0.29, p < 0.02), and the MAL QOM (n = 11, +0.14/5, 95% CI = 0.08-0.20, p < 0.02).ConclusionsMotor benefits were observed immediately after intervention and at a 6-month follow-up. Reduced impairment would appear to translate to increased activity. Although preliminary, the results are encouraging and lay the foundation for future studies to confirm the findings and define the optimal dose-response curve.Clinical trial registrationwww.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT03208634.
| S-EPMC8957862 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate if bilateral or unilateral upper limb robot-assisted rehabilitation training using a new three-dimensional end-effector robot that targets shoulder and elbow flexion and abduction is superior to conventional therapy with regard to upper extremity motor function recovery and neuromuscular improvement in stroke patients.DesignRandomized, controlled, parallel, assessor-blinded, three-arm clinical trial.SettingSoutheast University Zhongda Hospital Nanjing, Jiangsu, China.MethodsSeventy patients with hemiplegic stroke were randomly assigned to conventional training (Control, n = 23) or unilateral (URT, n = 23), or bilateral robotic training (BRT, n = 24). The conventional group received routine rehabilitation, 60 min/day, 6 days/week, for 3 weeks. For URT and BRT upper limb robot-assisted rehabilitation training was added. This was 60 min/day, 6 days/week, for 3 weeks. The primary outcome was upper limb motor function assessed with Fugl-Meyer-Upper Extremity Scale (FMA-UE). Secondary outcomes were activities of daily living (ADL) assessed with the Modified Barthel Index (MBI), Motor Evoked Potential (MEP) to assess corticospinal tract connectivity, Root Mean Square (RMS) value, and integrate Electromyography (iEMG) value recorded by surface electromyography to evaluate muscle contraction function.ResultsThe primary outcome indicator FMA-UE (least square mean (LSMEAN): 31.40, 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 27.74-35.07) and the secondary outcome indicator MBI (LSMEAN: 69.95, 95% CI: 66.69-73.21) were significantly improved in BRT as opposed to control (FMA-UE, LSMEAN: 24.79, 95% CI: 22.23-27.35; MBI, LSMEAN: 62.75, 95% CI: 59.42-66.09); and unilateral (FMA-UE, LSMEAN: 25.97, 95% CI: 23.57-28.36; MBI, LSMEAN: 64.34, 95% CI: 61.01-67.68). BRT also showed greater improvement in the anterior deltoid bundle with regard to muscle contraction function indicated by RMS (LSMEAN: 257.79, 95% CI: 211.45-304.12) and iEMG (LSMEAN: 202.01, 95% CI: 167.09-236.94), as compared to the controls (RMS, LSMEAN: 170.77, 95% CI: 148.97-192.58; iEMG, LSMEAN: 132.09, 95% CI: 114.51-149.68), and URT (RMS, LSMEAN: 179.05, 95% CI: 156.03-202.07; iEMG, LSMEAN: 130.38, 95% CI: 107.50-153.26). There was no statistically significant difference between URT and conventional training for any outcome. There was no significant difference in MEP extraction rate after treatment between groups (p = 0.54 for URT, p = 0.08 for BRT).ConclusionsA 60 min daily training for upper extremities using a three-dimensional end-effector targeting elbow and shoulder adding conventional rehabilitation appears to promote upper limb function and ADL in stroke patients only if delivered bilaterally. URT does not seem to result in better outcomes than conventional rehabilitation. Electrophysiological results suggest that training using a bilateral upper limb robot increases the recruitment of motor neurons rather than improving the conduction function of the corticospinal tract.
| S-EPMC10143606 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundRehabilitation robotics is progressing towards developing robots that can be used as advanced tools to augment the role of a therapist. These robots are capable of not only offering more frequent and more accessible therapies but also providing new insights into treatment effectiveness based on their ability to measure interaction parameters. A requirement for having more advanced therapies is to identify how robots can 'adapt' to each individual's needs at different stages of recovery. Hence, our research focused on developing an adaptive interface for the GENTLE/A rehabilitation system. The interface was based on a lead-lag performance model utilising the interaction between the human and the robot. The goal of the present study was to test the adaptability of the GENTLE/A system to the performance of the user.MethodsPoint-to-point movements were executed using the HapticMaster (HM) robotic arm, the main component of the GENTLE/A rehabilitation system. The points were displayed as balls on the screen and some of the points also had a real object, providing a test-bed for the human-robot interaction (HRI) experiment. The HM was operated in various modes to test the adaptability of the GENTLE/A system based on the leading/lagging performance of the user. Thirty-two healthy participants took part in the experiment comprising of a training phase followed by the actual-performance phase.ResultsThe leading or lagging role of the participant could be used successfully to adjust the duration required by that participant to execute point-to-point movements, in various modes of robot operation and under various conditions. The adaptability of the GENTLE/A system was clearly evident from the durations recorded. The regression results showed that the participants required lower execution times with the help from a real object when compared to just a virtual object. The 'reaching away' movements were longer to execute when compared to the 'returning towards' movements irrespective of the influence of the gravity on the direction of the movement.ConclusionsThe GENTLE/A system was able to adapt so that the duration required to execute point-to-point movement was according to the leading or lagging performance of the user with respect to the robot. This adaptability could be useful in the clinical settings when stroke subjects interact with the system and could also serve as an assessment parameter across various interaction sessions. As the system adapts to user input, and as the task becomes easier through practice, the robot would auto-tune for more demanding and challenging interactions. The improvement in performance of the participants in an embedded environment when compared to a virtual environment also shows promise for clinical applicability, to be tested in due time. Studying the physiology of upper arm to understand the muscle groups involved, and their influence on various movements executed during this study forms a key part of our future work.
| S-EPMC3849953 | biostudies-literature
Project description:: Studies of stroke patients undergoing robot-assisted rehabilitation have revealed various kinematic parameters describing movement quality of the upper limb. However, due to the different level of stroke impairment and different assessment criteria and interventions, the evaluation of the effectiveness of rehabilitation program is undermined. This paper presents a systematic review of kinematic assessments of movement quality of the upper limb and identifies the suitable parameters describing impairments in stroke patients. A total of 41 different clinical and pilot studies on different phases of stroke recovery utilizing kinematic parameters are evaluated. Kinematic parameters describing movement accuracy are mostly reported for chronic patients with statistically significant outcomes and correlate strongly with clinical assessments. Meanwhile, parameters describing feed-forward sensorimotor control are the most frequently reported in studies on sub-acute patients with significant outcomes albeit without correlation to any clinical assessments. However, lack of measures in coordinated movement and proximal component of upper limb enunciate the difficulties to distinguish the exploitation of joint redundancies exhibited by stroke patients in completing the movement. A further study on overall measures of coordinated movement is recommended.
| S-EPMC4180322 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Stroke is a leading cause of disability. Rehabilitation robotics have been developed to aid in recovery after a stroke. This study determined the additional cost of robot-assisted therapy and tested its cost-effectiveness.We estimated the intervention costs and tracked participants' healthcare costs. We collected quality of life using the Stroke Impact Scale and the Health Utilities Index. We analyzed the cost data at 36 weeks postrandomization using multivariate regression models controlling for site, presence of a prior stroke, and Veterans Affairs costs in the year before randomization.A total of 127 participants were randomized to usual care plus robot therapy (n=49), usual care plus intensive comparison therapy (n=50), or usual care alone (n=28). The average cost of delivering robot therapy and intensive comparison therapy was $5152 and $7382, respectively (P<0.001), and both were significantly more expensive than usual care alone (no additional intervention costs). At 36 weeks postrandomization, the total costs were comparable for the 3 groups ($17 831 for robot therapy, $19 746 for intensive comparison therapy, and $19 098 for usual care). Changes in quality of life were modest and not statistically different.The added cost of delivering robot or intensive comparison therapy was recuperated by lower healthcare use costs compared with those in the usual care group. However, uncertainty remains about the cost-effectiveness of robotic-assisted rehabilitation compared with traditional rehabilitation. Clinical Trial Registration- URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00372411.
| S-EPMC4445835 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC6620612 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Prior studies examining predictors of favorable clinical outcomes after upper limb robot-assisted therapy (RT) have many shortcomings. Therefore, the aim of this study was to identify meaningful predictors and a prediction model for clinically significant motor improvement in upper limb impairment after RT for each stroke phase. This retrospective, single-center study enrolled patients with stroke who received RT using InMotion2 along with conventional therapy (CT) from January 2015 to September 2019. Demographic characteristics, clinical measures, and robotic kinematic measures were evaluated. The primary outcome measure was the Fugl-Meyer Assessment-Upper Extremity (FMA-UE) and we classified patients with improvement more than the minimal clinically important difference as responders for each stroke phase. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to assess the relationship between potential predictors and RT responders and determine meaningful predictors. Subsequently, meaningful predictors were included in the final prediction model. One hundred forty-four patients were enrolled. The Hand Movement Scale and time since onset were significant predictors of clinically significant improvement in upper limb impairment (P = 0.045 and 0.043, respectively), as represented by the FMA-UE score after RT along with CT, in patients with subacute stroke. These variables were also meaningful predictors with borderline statistical significance in patients with chronic stroke (P = 0.076 and 0.066, respectively). Better hand movement and a shorter time since onset can be used as realistic predictors of clinically significant motor improvement in upper limb impairment after RT with InMotion2 alongside CT in patients with subacute and chronic stroke. This information may help healthcare professionals discern optimal patients for RT and accurately inform patients and caregivers about outcomes of RT.
| S-EPMC8281036 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Although the effects of robot-assisted arm training after stroke are promising, the relative effects of unilateral (URT) vs. bilateral (BRT) robot-assisted arm training remain uncertain. This study compared the effects of URT vs. BRT on upper extremity (UE) control, trunk compensation, and function in patients with chronic stroke.This was a single-blinded, randomized controlled trial. The intervention was implemented at 4 hospitals. Fifty-three patients with stroke were randomly assigned to URT, BRT, or control treatment (CT). Each group received UE training for 90 to 105 min/day, 5 days/week, for 4 weeks. The kinematic variables for arm motor control and trunk compensation included normalized movement time, normalized movement units, and the arm-trunk contribution slope in unilateral and bilateral tasks. Motor function and daily function were measured by the Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT), Motor Activity Log (MAL), and ABILHAND Questionnaire.The BRT and CT groups elicited significantly larger slope values (i.e., less trunk compensation) at the start of bilateral reaching than the URT group. URT led to significantly better effects on WMFT-Time than BRT. Differences in arm control kinematics and performance on the MAL and ABILHAND among the 3 groups were not significant.BRT and URT resulted in differential improvements in specific UE/trunk performance in patients with stroke. BRT elicited larger benefits than URT on reducing compensatory trunk movements at the beginning of reaching. In contrast, URT produced better improvements in UE temporal efficiency. These relative effects on movement kinematics, however, did not translate into differential benefits in daily functions.ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00917605.
| S-EPMC3640972 | biostudies-literature