Stroke, Upper-limb Paresis
Conditions
Keywords
Stroke, hemiplegia, automatic pilot, upper-limb rehabilitation
Brief summary
Many patients retain upper-limb motor impairment following stroke. Most conventional rehabilitation techniques are aimed to improve motor intentional movement by repeated exercises. These techniques require attentional load and are responsible for significant fatigue that probably represents a limiting factor. Alternatively, the automatic control of action is now well documented. A rehabilitation method based on this principle could allow recovery of more natural movements. Hypothesis: Stimulating automatic motricity improves upper-limb motor skills compared with a rehabilitation technique based on intentional movements.
Interventions
OTHERmotor training
Subject will perform prehension exercises on an automated table. After the initiation of the arm movement, the target to be grasped is programmed to move in order to stimulate automatic motricity.
Sponsors
Hospices Civils de Lyon
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE (Subject, Outcomes Assessor)
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 80 Years
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* All subjects must be between the ages of 18-80 and must not be pregnant * Patients volunteer to participate in the study, with a written informed consent signed * Affiliation to a national health insurance program * Hemiplegia after stroke * Stroke onset \>6 weeks and \<4 years prior to study enrollment * Patients able to perform the exercises on the automated table
Exclusion criteria
* Pregnancy * Excessive pain in any joint of the paretic extremity (VAS\>5) * Coexistent major neurological or psychiatric disease as to decrease number of confounders * Subjects with global aphasia and deficits of comprehension * Any substantial decrease in alertness, language reception, or attention that might interfere with understanding instructions for motor testing
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Fugl Meyer assessment (upper extremity) of motor recovery following stroke | 2 weeks following the last day of the intervention (Day 26) | we are looking for a change in scores between the baseline session score (Day 1), and those collected during this follow-up session (Day 26). |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| modified Ashworth scale | immediately following the last day of the intervention (Day 12) and 2 weeks following the last day of the intervention (Day 26) | we are looking for a change in scores between the baseline session score (Day 1), and those collected during each follow-up session. |
| Visual Analog Pain Scale | immediately following the last day of the intervention (Day 12) and 2 weeks following the last day of the intervention (Day 26) | we are looking for a change in scores between the baseline session score (Day 1), and those collected during each follow-up session. |
| Box and block test | immediately following the last day of the intervention (Day 12) and 2 weeks following the last day of the intervention (Day 26) | we are looking for a change in scores between the baseline session score (Day 1), and those collected during each follow-up session |
| Fugl Meyer assessment (upper extremity) of motor recovery following stroke | immediately following the last day of the intervention (Day 12) | we are looking for a change in scores between the baseline session score (Day 1), and those collected during each follow-up session |
| Motor Activity Log (MAL | immediately following the last day of the intervention (Day 12) and 2 weeks following the last day of the intervention (Day 26) | we are looking for a change in scores between the baseline session score (Day 1), and those collected during each follow-up session. |
| Functional independence scale (MIF) | immediately following the last day of the intervention (Day 12) and 2 weeks following the last day of the intervention (Day 26) | we are looking for a change in scores between the baseline session score (Day 1), and those collected during each follow-up session |
| Frenchey Arm Test | immediately following the last day of the intervention (Day 12) and 2 weeks following the last day of the intervention (Day 26) | we are looking for a change in scores between the baseline session score (Day 1), and those collected during each follow-up session. |
Countries
France
Outcome results
None listed