search
Back to results

Providing Sitting Balance Training With a Newly Developed Rehabilitation Device (T-Chair)

Primary Purpose

Stroke

Status
Completed
Phase
Not Applicable
Locations
Belgium
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
T-chair
Sponsored by
KU Leuven
About
Eligibility
Locations
Arms
Outcomes
Full info

About this trial

This is an interventional treatment trial for Stroke focused on measuring Stroke, Rehabilitation, Chronic phase, feasibility, randomized controlled trial

Eligibility Criteria

18 Years - 110 Years (Adult, Older Adult)All SexesDoes not accept healthy volunteers

Inclusion Criteria:

  1. First major stroke event, a transient ischemic attack or a previous stroke with full recovery is allowed.
  2. Impairment of the trunk function, with a maximum score of 19 on the trunk impairment scale .
  3. Able to maintain seated position for more than 10 seconds.
  4. Able to come to the rehabilitation ward as a chronic patient.
  5. More than six months after a stroke event.
  6. Older than 18 years.
  7. With no comorbidities other than stroke affecting trunk function. Comorbidities could be musculoskeletal problems or other neurological diseases.
  8. With sufficient cognitive and language capacity to perform the assessment.

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Not able to give informed consent.
  2. Not approved informed consent.
  3. Subject does not understand the study procedures.
  4. Subject has any history of another major neurological disorder.

Sites / Locations

  • Liselot Thijs

Arms of the Study

Arm 1

Arm 2

Arm Type

Experimental

No Intervention

Arm Label

Measurements and T-chair training

Measurements

Arm Description

This group will receive three measurements sessions and training with a new developed device (15 therapy sessions in total).

This group will receive three measurements sessions.

Outcomes

Primary Outcome Measures

Recruitment
Recruitment is characterized by the number of possible participants divided by the number of participants actually participated in the trial.
Retention
Retention is the number of participants that complete the whole trial divided by the number of participants that are included in the study.
Participation
During each therapy the therapist evaluates the participation of each candidate.
Adherence
After each therapy session the therapist evaluates the adherence using the Clinician Rating of Compliance Scale. This is a seven point ordinal scale which assesses the level of adherence of the patient. A higher score represent better adherence. A score lower than five is defined as non-adherent.
Acceptability and enjoyment
The level of enjoyment during the training will be assessed using the physical activity enjoyment scale. This scale contains 18 items, during the training participants have to score how they feel about the training on a seven-point bipolar scale. The lowest score stands for less enjoyment or acceptance, a higher score stands for maximum enjoyment or acceptance.
Safety and Adverse events
Safety is evaluated by retaining all adverse events during the therapy sessions.
Device development or modifications
Feedback from the participants and therapists to improve the device are noted after every session. Each patient and therapist who came in contact with the device received an experience questionnaire. The questionnaire contains 16 questions, 3 questions and 13 categorical questions on 5 or 7 point Likert scale.
Fatigue
After each training session fatigue will be evaluated using Visual Analog Fatigue Scale.This scale consists of a 10 cm horizontal line with written description at each end of the line. The written description varies from no fatigue to Very Severe Fatigue on top of the 10 cm line.
Patient Global Impression of Change
The patient Global impression of change is a one single question to rate their condition after the therapy sessions compared to the rate of their condition at the start of the therapy session. This scale will be evaluated twice. One time after two weeks of intervention and once after the four weeks of intervention.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Trunk function
The trunk impairment scale evaluates static and dynamic sitting balance and trunk coordination. The trunk impairment scale scores the trunk function based on 17 items on an ordinal scale. A higher score indicates a better trunk function. The maximum score on this scale is 23 points.
Trunk stability
This will be done by performing the modified functional reaching task. More distance is a better outcome.
Trunk strength
We measure strength in Newton with a hand-held dynamometer (MicroFet 2) of a variety of trunk muscle groups. A higher values stands for a better outcome.
Sitting balance
The limits of stability will be evaluated using the balance platform BioRescue or similar measurement.
Walking speed
Walking at comfortable speed and at maximum speed. Each condition will be performed three times. Patient safety will be guaranteed by a therapist walking next to the patient. Walking speed will also be registered using the GAITRite, which is a CE-marked rehabilitation device.
Walking capacity
The functional ambulation categories examines the level of walking capacity. This test is a six-point scale. It ranges from non-functional walking to walking independently on an unstable surface. At first, we evaluate in this test if the participant is able to walk with or without aid or supervision of two or one therapists. If this is possible, then the assessor evaluates if walking is possible only on an even (indoor) or uneven (outdoor) surface. In this test, the participants will be allowed to use a walking aid. A higher level stands for better walking abilities.
Walking endurance
We evaluate the endurance of walking by using the two-minute walk test (2MWT). The participants walk for two minutes at a standardized indoor walking track and may use a walking aid.
Lower extremities strength
We measure strength in Newton with a hand-held dynamometer (MicroFet 2) of a variety of lower limb muscle groups.
Selective movements of the lower extremities and coordination
We utilize the Fugl-Meyer assessment scale to evaluate selective movements of both the lower extremities.The motor score for the extremities includes assessment of reflex reactions, coordination as well as movements of the shoulder, elbow, wrist, hip, knee and ankle joint. The scoring ranges from 0-34 for selective movements and coordination of the lower extremities and 66 for selective movements and coordination of the upper extremities. A higher score represents a better motor function. We collect the total score and sub scores.
Balance
The Berg Balance scale scores sitting and standing balance based on 14 items. The score ranges from 0 to 56. For each item, the scoring is possible on a 4-point ordinal scale. A higher score represents a better outcome.
Number of falls
Participants in this study all receive an agenda to note the number of falls and the circumstances of the falls. During the four study weeks they have to fill in the agenda when a fall or an almost fall incident occurs.

Full Information

First Posted
June 29, 2020
Last Updated
January 14, 2022
Sponsor
KU Leuven
search

1. Study Identification

Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT04467554
Brief Title
Providing Sitting Balance Training With a Newly Developed Rehabilitation Device
Acronym
T-Chair
Official Title
Monocenter Interventional Study: Providing Sitting Balance Training With a Newly Developed Rehabilitation Device in the Chronic Stage After Stroke A Feasibility and Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial
Study Type
Interventional

2. Study Status

Record Verification Date
January 2022
Overall Recruitment Status
Completed
Study Start Date
July 17, 2020 (Actual)
Primary Completion Date
December 18, 2020 (Actual)
Study Completion Date
July 13, 2021 (Actual)

3. Sponsor/Collaborators

Responsible Party, by Official Title
Principal Investigator
Name of the Sponsor
KU Leuven

4. Oversight

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

5. Study Description

Brief Summary
This clinical study is being conducted to evaluate a new training device, the T-CHAIR, for trunk rehabilitation and post-stroke balance. The investigators would like to study three objectives. First, the investigators want to examine whether training with a new training device is feasible and safe during rehabilitation in the later phase, more than six months after a stroke. The investigators also evaluate whether training with a new training device has an effect on the sitting balance and the function and strength of the trunk. Finally, the investigators examine whether training with a new training device has an effect on walking, standing and activities of daily life and self-care.
Detailed Description
The primary goal of this study is to evaluate safety, acceptance and feasibility when participants in the chronic phase after a stroke train with this newly developed trainings device. Secondly, the investigators will evaluate the effect of training with this device on secondary outcome parameters such as trunk function, standing and sitting balance, gait and selective movement. The investigators compare the effect on secondary outcomes of the experimental intervention with a control intervention using a randomized controlled trial. Both groups include participants in the chronic phase post-stroke. TRIAL OBJECTIVES AND PURPOSE The primary objective of the proposed project is to investigate the feasibility and safety of sitting balance training on the T-chair, in the chronic phase (>6 months) after stroke. The second objective of the study is to investigate if utilizing the T-chair has an effect on sitting balance, trunk function and trunk strength in participants post stroke, in comparison to conventional therapy. Thirdly, the investigators will examine if training on the T-chair has an effect on other parameters, such as gait, balance, activities of daily living and reintegration in community. TYPE AND DESIGN OF THE TRIAL WITH HYPOTHESIS This study is a monocenter randomized controlled trial, evaluating participants in the chronic phase (>6 months) after stroke. This study will be performed in a rehabilitation center (outpatient department) in Belgium. In this study two groups will be included; the experimental group will receive usual therapy plus additional training on the T-chair, the control group will receive usual therapy only. The investigators believe this is feasible to provide only additional therapy in the experimental group, as our trial is designed to examine the effect of a specific type of additional therapy (independent sitting balance training), and not to compare the effect of one therapy over another kind of therapy. Hypotheses: The T-chair is a safe and feasible training device, to train trunk function in the subacute and chronic phase after stroke. Training on the T-chair has a positive effect on trunk function and strength compared to conventional therapy. Training on the T-chair has a positive effect on balance, gait, walking endurance, walking speed, activities of daily living, level of disability and change in patient status compared to conventional therapy. ASSESSMENT Data such as age, date of stroke, type of stroke, localization of stroke, comorbidities, dominant hand, educational level and gender are registered. Testing will be performed three times. Two test moments at baseline, with an interval of 2 weeks. The third test moment will be conducted after the after the four weeks intervention. The investigators evaluate feasibility and effect of sitting balance training with different standardized measures. All the outcome measures will be assessed using clinical measurement tools, whereby the investigators evaluated trunk selectivity and strength, leg selectivity and strength, walking abilities, level of functional performance and balance. Trunk strength will be assessed with a hand dynanometer and trunk stability with a balance platform BioRescue (RM Ingénierie, France). The psychometric properties of the majority of the measurement tools were evaluated through a literature search. The investigators found a high interrater reliability, ranging from 0.74 to 0.99 and an excellent test-retest reliability, ranging from 0.90 to 0.99.

6. Conditions and Keywords

Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Stroke
Keywords
Stroke, Rehabilitation, Chronic phase, feasibility, randomized controlled trial

7. Study Design

Primary Purpose
Treatment
Study Phase
Not Applicable
Interventional Study Model
Parallel Assignment
Model Description
Pilot randomized controlled trial
Masking
Outcomes Assessor
Allocation
Randomized
Enrollment
30 (Actual)

8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions

Arm Title
Measurements and T-chair training
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
This group will receive three measurements sessions and training with a new developed device (15 therapy sessions in total).
Arm Title
Measurements
Arm Type
No Intervention
Arm Description
This group will receive three measurements sessions.
Intervention Type
Device
Intervention Name(s)
T-chair
Intervention Description
Participants will receive 15 sessions of intervention, four weeks in total with a duration of one hour for each session. The focus of the intervention will be trunk rehabilitation.
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Recruitment
Description
Recruitment is characterized by the number of possible participants divided by the number of participants actually participated in the trial.
Time Frame
Through study completion, an average of 1.5 months.
Title
Retention
Description
Retention is the number of participants that complete the whole trial divided by the number of participants that are included in the study.
Time Frame
Through study completion, an average of 1.5 months.
Title
Participation
Description
During each therapy the therapist evaluates the participation of each candidate.
Time Frame
Through study completion, an average of 1.5 months.
Title
Adherence
Description
After each therapy session the therapist evaluates the adherence using the Clinician Rating of Compliance Scale. This is a seven point ordinal scale which assesses the level of adherence of the patient. A higher score represent better adherence. A score lower than five is defined as non-adherent.
Time Frame
Through study completion, an average of 1.5 months.
Title
Acceptability and enjoyment
Description
The level of enjoyment during the training will be assessed using the physical activity enjoyment scale. This scale contains 18 items, during the training participants have to score how they feel about the training on a seven-point bipolar scale. The lowest score stands for less enjoyment or acceptance, a higher score stands for maximum enjoyment or acceptance.
Time Frame
Through study completion, an average of 1.5 months.
Title
Safety and Adverse events
Description
Safety is evaluated by retaining all adverse events during the therapy sessions.
Time Frame
Through study completion, an average of 1.5 months.
Title
Device development or modifications
Description
Feedback from the participants and therapists to improve the device are noted after every session. Each patient and therapist who came in contact with the device received an experience questionnaire. The questionnaire contains 16 questions, 3 questions and 13 categorical questions on 5 or 7 point Likert scale.
Time Frame
Through study completion, an average of 1.5 months.
Title
Fatigue
Description
After each training session fatigue will be evaluated using Visual Analog Fatigue Scale.This scale consists of a 10 cm horizontal line with written description at each end of the line. The written description varies from no fatigue to Very Severe Fatigue on top of the 10 cm line.
Time Frame
Through study completion, an average of 1.5 months.
Title
Patient Global Impression of Change
Description
The patient Global impression of change is a one single question to rate their condition after the therapy sessions compared to the rate of their condition at the start of the therapy session. This scale will be evaluated twice. One time after two weeks of intervention and once after the four weeks of intervention.
Time Frame
Through study completion, an average of 1.5 months.
Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Trunk function
Description
The trunk impairment scale evaluates static and dynamic sitting balance and trunk coordination. The trunk impairment scale scores the trunk function based on 17 items on an ordinal scale. A higher score indicates a better trunk function. The maximum score on this scale is 23 points.
Time Frame
Through study completion, an average of 1.5 months.
Title
Trunk stability
Description
This will be done by performing the modified functional reaching task. More distance is a better outcome.
Time Frame
Through study completion, an average of 1.5 months.
Title
Trunk strength
Description
We measure strength in Newton with a hand-held dynamometer (MicroFet 2) of a variety of trunk muscle groups. A higher values stands for a better outcome.
Time Frame
Through study completion, an average of 1.5 months.
Title
Sitting balance
Description
The limits of stability will be evaluated using the balance platform BioRescue or similar measurement.
Time Frame
Through study completion, an average of 1.5 months.
Title
Walking speed
Description
Walking at comfortable speed and at maximum speed. Each condition will be performed three times. Patient safety will be guaranteed by a therapist walking next to the patient. Walking speed will also be registered using the GAITRite, which is a CE-marked rehabilitation device.
Time Frame
Through study completion, an average of 1.5 months.
Title
Walking capacity
Description
The functional ambulation categories examines the level of walking capacity. This test is a six-point scale. It ranges from non-functional walking to walking independently on an unstable surface. At first, we evaluate in this test if the participant is able to walk with or without aid or supervision of two or one therapists. If this is possible, then the assessor evaluates if walking is possible only on an even (indoor) or uneven (outdoor) surface. In this test, the participants will be allowed to use a walking aid. A higher level stands for better walking abilities.
Time Frame
Through study completion, an average of 1.5 months.
Title
Walking endurance
Description
We evaluate the endurance of walking by using the two-minute walk test (2MWT). The participants walk for two minutes at a standardized indoor walking track and may use a walking aid.
Time Frame
Through study completion, an average of 1.5 months.
Title
Lower extremities strength
Description
We measure strength in Newton with a hand-held dynamometer (MicroFet 2) of a variety of lower limb muscle groups.
Time Frame
Through study completion, an average of 1.5 months.
Title
Selective movements of the lower extremities and coordination
Description
We utilize the Fugl-Meyer assessment scale to evaluate selective movements of both the lower extremities.The motor score for the extremities includes assessment of reflex reactions, coordination as well as movements of the shoulder, elbow, wrist, hip, knee and ankle joint. The scoring ranges from 0-34 for selective movements and coordination of the lower extremities and 66 for selective movements and coordination of the upper extremities. A higher score represents a better motor function. We collect the total score and sub scores.
Time Frame
Through study completion, an average of 1.5 months.
Title
Balance
Description
The Berg Balance scale scores sitting and standing balance based on 14 items. The score ranges from 0 to 56. For each item, the scoring is possible on a 4-point ordinal scale. A higher score represents a better outcome.
Time Frame
Through study completion, an average of 1.5 months.
Title
Number of falls
Description
Participants in this study all receive an agenda to note the number of falls and the circumstances of the falls. During the four study weeks they have to fill in the agenda when a fall or an almost fall incident occurs.
Time Frame
Through study completion, an average of 1.5 months.

10. Eligibility

Sex
All
Minimum Age & Unit of Time
18 Years
Maximum Age & Unit of Time
110 Years
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria: First major stroke event, a transient ischemic attack or a previous stroke with full recovery is allowed. Impairment of the trunk function, with a maximum score of 19 on the trunk impairment scale . Able to maintain seated position for more than 10 seconds. Able to come to the rehabilitation ward as a chronic patient. More than six months after a stroke event. Older than 18 years. With no comorbidities other than stroke affecting trunk function. Comorbidities could be musculoskeletal problems or other neurological diseases. With sufficient cognitive and language capacity to perform the assessment. Exclusion Criteria: Not able to give informed consent. Not approved informed consent. Subject does not understand the study procedures. Subject has any history of another major neurological disorder.
Facility Information:
Facility Name
Liselot Thijs
City
Leuven
ZIP/Postal Code
3000
Country
Belgium

12. IPD Sharing Statement

Plan to Share IPD
No
Citations:
PubMed Identifier
34321042
Citation
Thijs L, Voets E, Wiskerke E, Nauwelaerts T, Arys Y, Haspeslagh H, Kool J, Bischof P, Bauer C, Lemmens R, Baumgartner D, Verheyden G. Technology-supported sitting balance therapy versus usual care in the chronic stage after stroke: a pilot randomized controlled trial. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2021 Jul 28;18(1):120. doi: 10.1186/s12984-021-00910-7.
Results Reference
derived
Links:
URL
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-021-00910-7
Description
Open access

Learn more about this trial

Providing Sitting Balance Training With a Newly Developed Rehabilitation Device

We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs