Stroke
Conditions
Keywords
stroke, robotic therapy, transcranial direct current stimulation
Brief summary
Stroke is the second cause of death worldwide and the majority of the survivors remain with motor impairments. Inhibition of the motor cortex of the unaffected hemisphere has emerged as a potential intervention to enhance effects of other rehabilitation strategies on improvement of motor performance of the paretic upper limb. In this proof-of-concept study we will evaluate the effects of inhibition of the motor cortex of the unaffected hemisphere associated with robotic therapy on improvement of motor performance of the paretic upper limb in the early phase post-stroke.
Detailed description
The main goal of this study is to test the proof of concept of benefits of inhibition of the motor cortex of the unaffected hemisphere on learning evaluated by improvement in kinematics of motor performance, in patients with upper limb paresis in the early phase post-stroke. For this purpose, patients will be randomized to receive real or sham transcranial direct current stimulation before a session of robotic therapy. Data will be collected by kinematic assessment performed automatically by the robot at baseline, immediately after and 24h after the intervention. The working hypothesis is that one session of upper limb motor training will lead to improvement of performance in metrics of kinematics, and this improvement will be maintained up to 24h after the end of the training.
Interventions
DEVICERobotic Therapy
Robotic therapy (MIT - Manus, Interactive Motion Technologies) will be administered for 40 minutes to the paretic upper limb.
DEVICEActive stimulation
Active transcranial direct current stimulation will be applied with the cathode positioned over the ipsilesional primary motor cortex and the anode over the contralateral supraorbital region for 20 minutes (1mA).
DEVICESham stimulation
In sham transcranial direct current stimulation, no current will be delivered through the transcranial direct current stimulation device after the first 30 seconds.
Sponsors
Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico
University of Sao Paulo General Hospital
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
OTHER
Masking
TRIPLE (Subject, Caregiver, Outcomes Assessor)
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 80 Years
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
Ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke onset from 3 days to 9 weeks before, confirmed by computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging. Motor impairment of an upper limb, defined as a score between 1 - 3 in the Medical Research Council Scale, for at lest one the following movements: elbow extension, shoulder flexion, or shoulder extension. Ability to provide written informed consent. Ability to comply with the schedule of interventions and evaluations in the protocol.
Exclusion criteria
Severe spasticity at the paretic elbow, wrist or fingers, defined as a score of \> 3 in the Modified Ashworth Spasticity Scale. No active shoulder and elbow movements Uncontrolled medical problems such as end-stage cancer or renal disease Pregnancy Potential contraindications to transcranial direct current stimulation: history of seizures, lesions on the scalp, intracranial metal implants, prior intracranial surgery, use of drugs that interfere on cortical excitability (such as antiepileptic drugs, benzodiazepines) Other neurological disorders such as Parkinson's disease Psychiatric illness Aphasia or severe cognitive deficits that compromise comprehension of the experimental protocol or ability to provide consent. Hemineglect Cerebellar lesions or on cerebellar pathways Contact precautions
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Movement Smoothness | Kinematic assessment at baseline, immediately after intervention; and 24h after. | The speed shape, calculated as mean speed divided by peak speed. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Number of peaks of the movement | kinematic assessment at baseline, immediately after intervention; and 24h after. | Number of peaks of the movement is calculated as the negative of the number of peaks in the speed profile. |
| Jerk metric of the movement | kinematic assessment at baseline, immediately after intervention; and 24h after | Jerk metric of the movement is calculated by dividing the negative mean jerk magnitude by the peak speed. |
Countries
Brazil
Outcome results
None listed