search
Back to results

Robot Aided Rehabilitation - Intervention (Aim2&3)

Primary Purpose

Stroke

Status
Recruiting
Phase
Not Applicable
Locations
United States
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
Passive stretching
Passive movement
IntelliArm
Hand robot
Sponsored by
University of Maryland, Baltimore
About
Eligibility
Locations
Arms
Outcomes
Full info

About this trial

This is an interventional treatment trial for Stroke focused on measuring Stroke, Spasticity, Arm, Hand, Robotic therapy

Eligibility Criteria

18 Years - 85 Years (Adult, Older Adult)All SexesDoes not accept healthy volunteers

Inclusion Criteria:

  • First focal unilateral lesion, ischemic or hemorrhagic
  • Had a stroke 1-12 months prior to enrollment
  • Rated between stages 2-4 on the Chedoke McMaster Stroke Assessment Impairment Inventory: Stage of Recovery of the Arm and Hand

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Apraxia
  • Score of less than 22 on the Mini Mental Status Exam
  • Severe pain in the shoulder by a self-rating of 7 out of 10 or greater
  • Severe contracture in the upper extremity
  • Unable to sit in a chair for 3 consecutive hours
  • Unrelated musculoskeletal injuries
  • Poor fit into equipment used in study
  • Botox injection in upper extremity within 4 months
  • Concurrent participation in gait or upper extremity intervention studies

Sites / Locations

  • University of Maryland, BaltimoreRecruiting

Arms of the Study

Arm 1

Arm 2

Arm 3

Arm 4

Arm Type

Experimental

Experimental

Experimental

Experimental

Arm Label

IntelliArm with passive stretching

IntelliArm with passive movement

The hand robot with passive stretching

The hand robot with passive movement

Arm Description

Groups are split into 2 conditions based on stretching and 2 conditions based on target of intervention (arm or hand). Subjects will complete up to 30 minutes of strong passive stretching, then followed by 45-60 minutes of active movement training with the IntelliArm.

Groups are split into 2 conditions based on stretching and 2 conditions based on target of intervention (arm or hand). Subjects will wear the IntelliArm for up to 30 minutes with gentle passive movement or little stretching, then followed by 45-60 minutes of active movement training with the IntelliArm.

Groups are split into 2 conditions based on stretching and 2 conditions based on target of intervention (arm or hand). Subjects will complete up to 30 minutes of strong passive stretching, then followed by 45-60 minutes of active movement training with the hand robot.

Groups are split into 2 conditions based on stretching and 2 conditions based on target of intervention (arm or hand). Subjects will wear the hand robot for up to 30 minutes with gentle passive movement or little stretching, then followed by 45-60 minutes of active movement training with the hand robot.

Outcomes

Primary Outcome Measures

Changes from baseline Graded Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT) at two time points
The WMFT is a quantitative measure of upper extremity motor ability through timed and functional tasks.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Changes from baseline Fugl-Meyer Upper Extremity at two time points
The Fugl-Meyer Assessment is a stroke-specific, performance-based impairment index. It is designed to assess motor functioning, balance, sensation and joint functioning in patients with post-stroke hemiplegia.
Changes from baseline Chedoke McMaster Stroke Assessment: Impairment Inventory of Arm and Hand at two time points
The Chedoke-McMaster Stroke Assessment (CMSA) is a screening and assessment tool utilized to measure physical impairment and activity of an individual following a stroke. The Chedoke Arm and Hand Activity Inventory (CAHAI) is used to assess functional ability of the paretic arm and hand. Each domain is scored on a 7-point scale.
Changes from baseline Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS) at two time points
The Modified Ashworth Scale is the most widely used assessment tool to measure resistance to limb movement in a clinic setting. Scores range from 0-4, with 6 choices. 0 (0) - No increase in muscle tone; 1 (1) - Slight increase in muscle tone, manifested by a catch and release or by minimal resistance at the end of the range of motion when the affected part(s) is moved in flexion or extension; 1+ (2) - Slight increase in muscle tone, manifested by a catch, followed by minimal resistance throughout the remainder (less than half) of the ROM (range of movement); 2 (3) - More marked increase in muscle tone through most of the ROM, but affect part(s) easily moved; 3 (4) - Considerable increase in muscle tone passive, movement difficult; 4 (5) - Affected part(s) rigid in flexion or extension.
Changes from baseline Action Research Arm Test (ARAT) at two time points
ARAT assesses the ability to handle objects differing in size, weight and shape and therefore can be considered to be an arm-specific measure of activity limitation.
Changes from baseline Grip Strength & Pinch Strength at two time points
A dynamometer is used to measure grip strength and a pinch gauge to measure tip, key, and palmar pinch.
Changes from baseline Nottingham Sensory Assessment at two time points
The assessment tests the tactile sensation of the patient through light touch, pressure and pinprick.
Changes from baseline range of motion (ROM) at two time points
The range of motion (ROM) of shoulder, elbow, wrist and fingers will be measured in Degree.
Changes from baseline spasticity at two time points
Spasticity will be measured by the resistance torque in Newton-meter under controlled movement at each joint.
Changes from baseline relaxation time of the finger flexor muscles at two time points
Relaxation time will be quantified in Second by examining flexor muscle activity. The subject will be instructed to grip maximally upon hearing an audible tone. The subject should then relax his/her grip as quickly as possible after hearing a second tone. The relaxation time is defined as the elapsed time in Second from the second tone to the point at which the flexor muscle magnitude returns to the baseline level + three standard deviations.

Full Information

First Posted
February 4, 2015
Last Updated
March 3, 2023
Sponsor
University of Maryland, Baltimore
Collaborators
National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research, North Carolina State University
search

1. Study Identification

Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT02359253
Brief Title
Robot Aided Rehabilitation - Intervention
Acronym
Aim2&3
Official Title
Robot-Aided Diagnosis, Passive-Active Arm Motor and Sensory Rehabilitation Post Stroke: Aims 2&3
Study Type
Interventional

2. Study Status

Record Verification Date
March 2023
Overall Recruitment Status
Recruiting
Study Start Date
October 14, 2018 (Actual)
Primary Completion Date
May 31, 2024 (Anticipated)
Study Completion Date
May 31, 2024 (Anticipated)

3. Sponsor/Collaborators

Responsible Party, by Official Title
Principal Investigator
Name of the Sponsor
University of Maryland, Baltimore
Collaborators
National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research, North Carolina State University

4. Oversight

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product
No
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product
No
Data Monitoring Committee
No

5. Study Description

Brief Summary
Sensorimotor impairments following stroke often involve complex pathological changes across multiple joints and multiple degrees of freedom of the arm and hand, thereby rendering them difficult to diagnose and treat. The objective of this study is to evaluate multi-joint neuromechanical impairments in the arm and hand, then conduct impairment-specific treatment, and determine the effects of arm versus hand training and the effects of passive stretching before active movement training.
Detailed Description
Sensorimotor impairments following stroke can lead to substantial disability involving the upper extremity. These impairments often involve complex pathological changes across multiple joints and multiple degrees-of-freedom of the arm and hand, thereby rendering them difficult to diagnose and treat. Many potential mechanisms, such as weakness, motoneuronal hyperexcitability, and elevated passive impedance, can contribute and it is currently unclear where to focus treatment. The objectives of this study are to address allocation of therapy resources between the arm and hand and to examine the benefits of combining passive stretching with active movement training. Aim 1. To compare the efficacy of training the arm versus the hand in promoting upper extremity rehabilitation. Hypothesis 1: Treating the proximal larger joints in the arm alone will lead to greater improvement than treating the distal hand alone. Aim 2. To examine the efficacy of combining passive stretching with active (assistive or resistive) training for the shoulder, elbow, wrist, and hand. Hypothesis 2: Multi-joint intelligent stretching followed by active (assistive or resistive) movement facilitated by use of the IntelliArm arm rehabilitation robot and a Hand rehabilitation robot will improve motor control of the upper extremity more than standard movement therapy alone. Subjects will be assigned randomly with equal chance to one of four groups. Groups are split into 2 conditions based on stretching and 2 conditions based on target of intervention (arm or hand). Half of all the subjects will be assigned to the stretching groups and the other half to the passive movement groups. Half of the subjects will be assigned to the arm-training and the remaining half to hand-training groups. Arm-training groups will use the IntelliArm, hand-training groups will use the hand robot. For those assigned to the stretching groups, subjects will complete up to 30 minutes of passive stretching with the IntelliArm or the hand robot. For those assigned to the passive movement condition, subjects will do the robot according to their group assignment and wear it for up to 30 minutes with little to no stretching preceding the active therapy session. For each group, the initial about 30 minutes of stretching or relaxing will be followed by 45-60 minutes of active therapy with the IntelliArm or hand robot (depending on group assignment), for a total session time of 75-90 minutes. The 4 groups of subjects will be compared against each other.

6. Conditions and Keywords

Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Stroke
Keywords
Stroke, Spasticity, Arm, Hand, Robotic therapy

7. Study Design

Primary Purpose
Treatment
Study Phase
Not Applicable
Interventional Study Model
Parallel Assignment
Masking
Outcomes Assessor
Allocation
Randomized
Enrollment
72 (Anticipated)

8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions

Arm Title
IntelliArm with passive stretching
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
Groups are split into 2 conditions based on stretching and 2 conditions based on target of intervention (arm or hand). Subjects will complete up to 30 minutes of strong passive stretching, then followed by 45-60 minutes of active movement training with the IntelliArm.
Arm Title
IntelliArm with passive movement
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
Groups are split into 2 conditions based on stretching and 2 conditions based on target of intervention (arm or hand). Subjects will wear the IntelliArm for up to 30 minutes with gentle passive movement or little stretching, then followed by 45-60 minutes of active movement training with the IntelliArm.
Arm Title
The hand robot with passive stretching
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
Groups are split into 2 conditions based on stretching and 2 conditions based on target of intervention (arm or hand). Subjects will complete up to 30 minutes of strong passive stretching, then followed by 45-60 minutes of active movement training with the hand robot.
Arm Title
The hand robot with passive movement
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
Groups are split into 2 conditions based on stretching and 2 conditions based on target of intervention (arm or hand). Subjects will wear the hand robot for up to 30 minutes with gentle passive movement or little stretching, then followed by 45-60 minutes of active movement training with the hand robot.
Intervention Type
Other
Intervention Name(s)
Passive stretching
Intervention Description
Prior to active training, subjects will be passively move their arm or hand by IntelliArm or the hand robot within preset ranges of motion.
Intervention Type
Other
Intervention Name(s)
Passive movement
Intervention Description
Prior to active training, subjects will be passively move their arm or hand by IntelliArm or the hand robot only within ranges that produce no to very minimal forces.
Intervention Type
Other
Intervention Name(s)
IntelliArm
Intervention Description
During the active training, subjects will be asked to actively move their arm while supported with IntelliArm robot to interact with virtual targets and objects. The IntelliArm may provide resistance or assistance.
Intervention Type
Other
Intervention Name(s)
Hand robot
Intervention Description
During the active training, subjects will be asked to actively open and close their hand with the hand robot on while participating in task oriented occupational therapy focused on grasp and release tasks. The hand robot may provide resistance or assistance.
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Changes from baseline Graded Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT) at two time points
Description
The WMFT is a quantitative measure of upper extremity motor ability through timed and functional tasks.
Time Frame
Within 2 week prior to intervention, 2 week following intervention, and 2 months following intervention
Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Changes from baseline Fugl-Meyer Upper Extremity at two time points
Description
The Fugl-Meyer Assessment is a stroke-specific, performance-based impairment index. It is designed to assess motor functioning, balance, sensation and joint functioning in patients with post-stroke hemiplegia.
Time Frame
Within 2 week prior to intervention, 2 week following intervention, and 2 months following intervention
Title
Changes from baseline Chedoke McMaster Stroke Assessment: Impairment Inventory of Arm and Hand at two time points
Description
The Chedoke-McMaster Stroke Assessment (CMSA) is a screening and assessment tool utilized to measure physical impairment and activity of an individual following a stroke. The Chedoke Arm and Hand Activity Inventory (CAHAI) is used to assess functional ability of the paretic arm and hand. Each domain is scored on a 7-point scale.
Time Frame
Within 2 weeks prior to intervention, 2 weeks following intervention, and 2 months following intervention
Title
Changes from baseline Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS) at two time points
Description
The Modified Ashworth Scale is the most widely used assessment tool to measure resistance to limb movement in a clinic setting. Scores range from 0-4, with 6 choices. 0 (0) - No increase in muscle tone; 1 (1) - Slight increase in muscle tone, manifested by a catch and release or by minimal resistance at the end of the range of motion when the affected part(s) is moved in flexion or extension; 1+ (2) - Slight increase in muscle tone, manifested by a catch, followed by minimal resistance throughout the remainder (less than half) of the ROM (range of movement); 2 (3) - More marked increase in muscle tone through most of the ROM, but affect part(s) easily moved; 3 (4) - Considerable increase in muscle tone passive, movement difficult; 4 (5) - Affected part(s) rigid in flexion or extension.
Time Frame
Within 2 weeks prior to intervention, 2 weeks following intervention, and 2 months following intervention
Title
Changes from baseline Action Research Arm Test (ARAT) at two time points
Description
ARAT assesses the ability to handle objects differing in size, weight and shape and therefore can be considered to be an arm-specific measure of activity limitation.
Time Frame
Within 2 weeks prior to intervention, 2 weeks following intervention, and 2 months following intervention
Title
Changes from baseline Grip Strength & Pinch Strength at two time points
Description
A dynamometer is used to measure grip strength and a pinch gauge to measure tip, key, and palmar pinch.
Time Frame
Within 2 weeks prior to intervention, 2 weeks following intervention, and 2 months following intervention
Title
Changes from baseline Nottingham Sensory Assessment at two time points
Description
The assessment tests the tactile sensation of the patient through light touch, pressure and pinprick.
Time Frame
Within 2 weeks prior to intervention, 2 weeks following intervention, and 2 months following intervention
Title
Changes from baseline range of motion (ROM) at two time points
Description
The range of motion (ROM) of shoulder, elbow, wrist and fingers will be measured in Degree.
Time Frame
Within 2 weeks prior to intervention, 2 weeks following intervention, and 2 months following intervention
Title
Changes from baseline spasticity at two time points
Description
Spasticity will be measured by the resistance torque in Newton-meter under controlled movement at each joint.
Time Frame
Within 2 weeks prior to intervention, 2 weeks following intervention, and 2 months following intervention
Title
Changes from baseline relaxation time of the finger flexor muscles at two time points
Description
Relaxation time will be quantified in Second by examining flexor muscle activity. The subject will be instructed to grip maximally upon hearing an audible tone. The subject should then relax his/her grip as quickly as possible after hearing a second tone. The relaxation time is defined as the elapsed time in Second from the second tone to the point at which the flexor muscle magnitude returns to the baseline level + three standard deviations.
Time Frame
Within 2 weeks prior to intervention, 2 weeks following intervention, and 2 months following intervention

10. Eligibility

Sex
All
Minimum Age & Unit of Time
18 Years
Maximum Age & Unit of Time
85 Years
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria: First focal unilateral lesion, ischemic or hemorrhagic Had a stroke 1-12 months prior to enrollment Rated between stages 2-4 on the Chedoke McMaster Stroke Assessment Impairment Inventory: Stage of Recovery of the Arm and Hand Exclusion Criteria: Apraxia Score of less than 22 on the Mini Mental Status Exam Severe pain in the shoulder by a self-rating of 7 out of 10 or greater Severe contracture in the upper extremity Unable to sit in a chair for 3 consecutive hours Unrelated musculoskeletal injuries Poor fit into equipment used in study Botox injection in upper extremity within 4 months Concurrent participation in gait or upper extremity intervention studies
Central Contact Person:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name or Official Title & Degree
Michael Graziano, Ph.D.
Phone
(410) 706-1584
Email
Michael.Graziano@som.umaryland.edu
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name or Official Title & Degree
Kyung Koh, Ph.D.
Phone
(410) 706-8625
Email
KKoh@som.umaryland.edu
Overall Study Officials:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Li-Qun Zhang, Ph.D.
Organizational Affiliation
University of Maryland, Baltimore
Official's Role
Principal Investigator
Facility Information:
Facility Name
University of Maryland, Baltimore
City
Baltimore
State/Province
Maryland
ZIP/Postal Code
21201
Country
United States
Individual Site Status
Recruiting
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Sanjana Rao, OT
Phone
410-706-4546
Email
Sanjana.rao@som.umaryland.edu
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Kyung Koh, Ph.D.
Phone
(410) 706-8625
Email
KKoh@som.umaryland.edu
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Li-Qun Zhang, Ph.D.

12. IPD Sharing Statement

Plan to Share IPD
No
Citations:
PubMed Identifier
23239837
Citation
Go AS, Mozaffarian D, Roger VL, Benjamin EJ, Berry JD, Borden WB, Bravata DM, Dai S, Ford ES, Fox CS, Franco S, Fullerton HJ, Gillespie C, Hailpern SM, Heit JA, Howard VJ, Huffman MD, Kissela BM, Kittner SJ, Lackland DT, Lichtman JH, Lisabeth LD, Magid D, Marcus GM, Marelli A, Matchar DB, McGuire DK, Mohler ER, Moy CS, Mussolino ME, Nichol G, Paynter NP, Schreiner PJ, Sorlie PD, Stein J, Turan TN, Virani SS, Wong ND, Woo D, Turner MB; American Heart Association Statistics Committee and Stroke Statistics Subcommittee. Heart disease and stroke statistics--2013 update: a report from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2013 Jan 1;127(1):e6-e245. doi: 10.1161/CIR.0b013e31828124ad. Epub 2012 Dec 12. No abstract available. Erratum In: Circulation. 2013 Jan 1;127(1):doi:10.1161/CIR.0b013e31828124ad. Circulation. 2013 Jun 11;127(23):e841.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
7737394
Citation
Haggard P, Wing A. Coordinated responses following mechanical perturbation of the arm during prehension. Exp Brain Res. 1995;102(3):483-94. doi: 10.1007/BF00230652.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
21832028
Citation
Hoffmann G, Schmit BD, Kahn JH, Kamper DG. Effect of sensory feedback from the proximal upper limb on voluntary isometric finger flexion and extension in hemiparetic stroke subjects. J Neurophysiol. 2011 Nov;106(5):2546-56. doi: 10.1152/jn.00522.2010. Epub 2011 Aug 10.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
12929190
Citation
Kamper DG, Harvey RL, Suresh S, Rymer WZ. Relative contributions of neural mechanisms versus muscle mechanics in promoting finger extension deficits following stroke. Muscle Nerve. 2003 Sep;28(3):309-18. doi: 10.1002/mus.10443.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
10842274
Citation
Kamper DG, Rymer WZ. Quantitative features of the stretch response of extrinsic finger muscles in hemiparetic stroke. Muscle Nerve. 2000 Jun;23(6):954-61. doi: 10.1002/(sici)1097-4598(200006)23:63.0.co;2-0.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
9826981
Citation
Mayer NH, Esquenazi A, Childers MK. Common patterns of clinical motor dysfunction. Muscle Nerve Suppl. 1997;6:S21-35.
Results Reference
background
Citation
Shumway-Cook A, Woollacott MH (2001) Motor Control: Theory and Practical Applications, 2nd ed. vol. Chapter 6. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
23096119
Citation
Ren Y, Kang SH, Park HS, Wu YN, Zhang LQ. Developing a multi-joint upper limb exoskeleton robot for diagnosis, therapy, and outcome evaluation in neurorehabilitation. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2013 May;21(3):490-9. doi: 10.1109/TNSRE.2012.2225073. Epub 2012 Oct 19.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
19833552
Citation
Rossi S, Hallett M, Rossini PM, Pascual-Leone A; Safety of TMS Consensus Group. Safety, ethical considerations, and application guidelines for the use of transcranial magnetic stimulation in clinical practice and research. Clin Neurophysiol. 2009 Dec;120(12):2008-2039. doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2009.08.016. Epub 2009 Oct 14.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
21211873
Citation
Gao F, Ren Y, Roth EJ, Harvey R, Zhang LQ. Effects of repeated ankle stretching on calf muscle-tendon and ankle biomechanical properties in stroke survivors. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2011 Jun;26(5):516-22. doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2010.12.003. Epub 2011 Jan 6.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
21343525
Citation
Wu YN, Hwang M, Ren Y, Gaebler-Spira D, Zhang LQ. Combined passive stretching and active movement rehabilitation of lower-limb impairments in children with cerebral palsy using a portable robot. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2011 May;25(4):378-85. doi: 10.1177/1545968310388666. Epub 2011 Feb 22.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
16344031
Citation
Selles RW, Li X, Lin F, Chung SG, Roth EJ, Zhang LQ. Feedback-controlled and programmed stretching of the ankle plantarflexors and dorsiflexors in stroke: effects of a 4-week intervention program. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005 Dec;86(12):2330-6. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2005.07.305.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
28541901
Citation
Zhang LQ, Son J, Park HS, Kang SH, Lee Y, Ren Y. Changes of Shoulder, Elbow, and Wrist Stiffness Matrix Post Stroke. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2017 Jul;25(7):844-851. doi: 10.1109/TNSRE.2017.2707238. Epub 2017 May 23.
Results Reference
background
Citation
Zhang LQ, Xu D, Kang SH, Roth EJ, Ren Y. Multi-Joint Somatosensory Assessment in Patients Post Stroke. BMES Ann Meeting, Phoenix. 2017.
Results Reference
background

Learn more about this trial

Robot Aided Rehabilitation - Intervention

We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs