Exploring New Approaches in Reaching Behavior Post Stroke
Primary Purpose
Stroke
Status
Completed
Phase
Not Applicable
Locations
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
stabilization training
auditory training group
Sponsored by

About this trial
This is an interventional treatment trial for Stroke focused on measuring rehabilitation, reaching, stroke
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria:
- Individuals all scored between 20 and 44 on the Upper-Arm subsection of the Fugl-Meyer Scale (FM- Poole & Whitney, 1988) and demonstrated some trunk movement during the pretest reaching performance scale measures (RPS, Levin 2006)
Exclusion Criteria:
- Individuals were referred if they had no receptive aphasia, apraxia or other cognitive deficits.
Sites / Locations
Arms of the Study
Arm 1
Arm 2
Arm Type
Active Comparator
Experimental
Arm Label
1
2
Arm Description
stabilization training group
auditory response training group
Outcomes
Primary Outcome Measures
WMFT
Secondary Outcome Measures
FM and shoulder flexion
Full Information
NCT ID
NCT00844870
First Posted
February 13, 2009
Last Updated
February 13, 2009
Sponsor
University of the Sciences in Philadelphia
1. Study Identification
Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT00844870
Brief Title
Exploring New Approaches in Reaching Behavior Post Stroke
Official Title
Training With or Without Upper Body Restraint During Reaching in Individuals Post Stroke
Study Type
Interventional
2. Study Status
Record Verification Date
February 2009
Overall Recruitment Status
Completed
Study Start Date
April 2007 (undefined)
Primary Completion Date
August 2008 (Actual)
Study Completion Date
September 2008 (Actual)
3. Sponsor/Collaborators
Name of the Sponsor
University of the Sciences in Philadelphia
4. Oversight
Data Monitoring Committee
No
5. Study Description
Brief Summary
After 4 weeks of training the hypothesis that the more natural training program would yield greater functional changes was proven correct.
Detailed Description
Analysis indicated that both methods improved reaching without trunk use Reaching performance scale (RPS), but the trunk -stabilized group led to more significant changes. Training under less restrictive conditions associated with Task-Related Training (TRT) (auditory feedback from trunk sensor) as compared to stabilized TRT, led to improved functional and impairment measure scores (WMFT, FM and shoulder flexion). Conclusion: Fading feedback with both training methods, during extended TRT reaching/grasping practice generally led to some improvements. However, as demonstrated by impairment and functional outcome measures, using TRT with an auditory feedback signals is a more effective approach than forcing the stabilization of the trunk during rehabilitation of the upper-limb.
6. Conditions and Keywords
Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Stroke
Keywords
rehabilitation, reaching, stroke
7. Study Design
Primary Purpose
Treatment
Study Phase
Not Applicable
Interventional Study Model
Parallel Assignment
Masking
ParticipantInvestigatorOutcomes Assessor
Allocation
Randomized
Enrollment
24 (Actual)
8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions
Arm Title
1
Arm Type
Active Comparator
Arm Description
stabilization training group
Arm Title
2
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
auditory response training group
Intervention Type
Behavioral
Intervention Name(s)
stabilization training
Intervention Description
training of arm function with the trunk stabilized
Intervention Type
Behavioral
Intervention Name(s)
auditory training group
Intervention Description
response to an auditory signal
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
WMFT
Time Frame
1 year
Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
FM and shoulder flexion
Time Frame
1 year
10. Eligibility
Sex
All
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria:
Individuals all scored between 20 and 44 on the Upper-Arm subsection of the Fugl-Meyer Scale (FM- Poole & Whitney, 1988) and demonstrated some trunk movement during the pretest reaching performance scale measures (RPS, Levin 2006)
Exclusion Criteria:
Individuals were referred if they had no receptive aphasia, apraxia or other cognitive deficits.
Overall Study Officials:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Gregory T Thielman, Ed.D
Organizational Affiliation
University of the Sciences in Philadelphia
Official's Role
Principal Investigator
12. IPD Sharing Statement
Learn more about this trial
Exploring New Approaches in Reaching Behavior Post Stroke
We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs