Stroke
Conditions
Keywords
rTMS, visual feedback, gait
Brief summary
After stroke, patients often experience motor deficits that interrupt normal lower extremity movement and gait function. Recent developments in neuroimaging have focus on the reasons why some patients recover well while some do poorly. However, there is still no consensus on the exact mechanisms involved in regaining the functions after rehabilitation. Application of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) to facilitate neural plasticity during stroke treatment has recently gained considerable attention. The possible mechanism through which rTMS acts is based on the interhemispheric competition (IHC) model, which explains that patients with stroke experience alterations in cortical excitability and exhibit abnormally high interhemispheric inhibition from the unaffected hemisphere to the affected hemisphere. The visual feedback training can improve postural control and enhance motor performance. Several rTMS studies have evaluated the lower extremity dysfunction following stroke, but few studies have explored the efficacy of applying rTMS on the lower extremities. We expect the study can help us to further exploration of the change of clinical function and cortical excitability following rTMS and visual feedback training in subjects with stroke. In addition, the results of this project will be provided for further rehabilitation programs in people with stroke.
Detailed description
Objective: To investigate the effects of combining rTMS with visual feedback training to improve movements in the paretic lower limb and gait performance. Methods: Thirty patients with monohemispheric after ischemic stroke will recruited and randomized into 3 groups. The group 1 received a 10-minute rTMS intervention then a 30-minute visual feedback training. The group 2 received a 10-minute sham rTMS intervention then a 30-minute visual feedback training. The group 3 received a 10-minute sham rTMS intervention then a 30-minute traditional rehabilitation training. All subjects received treatments 3 times a week for 4 weeks. The performance was assessed by a blinded assessor for two times (baseline and after 4 weeks). The outcome measures included Motor evoked potential (MEP), Fugl-Meyer Assessment-Lower Limb section(FMA-LE),Motor Assessment Score(MAS), Berg Balance Test (BBS),Time Up and Go (TUG), and Modified Barthel Index for ADL ability. Collected data will be analyzed with ANOVA test by SPSS version 20.0, and alpha level was set at 0.05. The hypothesis is combining rTMS with visual feedback training has positive effects on lower limb and gait performance among patients with stroke.
Interventions
BEHAVIORALrTMS
The EMG measured the MEPs of the anterior tibialis in response to the TMS delivered using a Magstim Rapid2 stimulator (Magstim Co, Ltd, Carmarthenshire, Wales, UK) with a 70-mm figure-8 coil (maximum power, 2.2 T) over the contralateral M1. The intensity was initially set at 100% of the machine output (MO) to determine the optimal stimulation site (hotspot). The hotspot was marked on the scalp with oil ink and recorded as x, y, in centimeters from the vertex (cz). The participants received real rTMS or sham rTMS, respectively (1 Hz, 10 min), which was before a 30-minute visual feedback training and/or traditional rehabilitation training.
BEHAVIORALvisual feedback training
Game-based visual feedback training system and software.The system was designed to enable the subjects to perform ankle movements in multiple axes.
BEHAVIORALtraditional rehabilitation
30 min traditional rehabilitation. The traditional rehabilitation programs included balance training, postural training, muscle strengthening, ambulation training and etc..
Sponsors
Taipei Medical University Hospital
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Outcomes Assessor)
Masking description
Single Blind (Outcomes Assessor)
Intervention model description
Randomized
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
20 Years to 80 Years
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
1. Monohemispheric ischemic or hemorrhage stroke 2. Subjects with first-ever stroke 3.6 months after stroke onset 4.The Brunnstrom stage of lower limb \>Ⅲ 5.\>23 in the mini-mental state exam 6.The Modified Ashworth Scale of lower limb \<3 7.Clear consciousness can meet the relevant assessments
Exclusion criteria
1. Recurrent stoke 2. Severe spasticity of lower limb and difficult to perform isolative movement. 3. History of seizures or epileptic 4. Have implanted ferromagnetic devices or other magnetic-sensitive metal implants 5. Concomitant vestibular and cerebellum diseases 6. Joint contracture of lower limb/foot and other orthopedic problems 7. Subjects with severe cognitive impairment 8. Subjects with depression and/or mood disorder 9. Presence of any comorbid neurological diseases or psychological diseases
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Change of Motor evoked potential | Change from baseline to 4 weeks | Measurement of motor evoked potential of anterior tibialis |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Chang of Motor Assessment Score | Change from baseline to 4 weeks | Lower Limb motor function |
| Chang of Berg Balance Test | Change from baseline to 4 weeks | standing balance |
| Chang of Fugl-Meyer Assessment-Lower Limb section | Change from baseline to 4 weeks | Lower Limb section |
| Chang of Modified barthel index | Change from baseline to 4 weeks | Activity of daily live ability |
| Chang of Time Up and Go | Change from baseline to 4 weeks | functional ambulation |
Countries
Taiwan
Outcome results
None listed