search
Back to results

Impact of a New Technology to Functional Recovery Upper Limb in Post Stroke Patients.

Primary Purpose

Stroke

Status
Unknown status
Phase
Not Applicable
Locations
Italy
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
Armeo Spring
Conventional Rehabilitation
Sponsored by
Habilita S.p.A.
About
Eligibility
Locations
Arms
Outcomes
Full info

About this trial

This is an interventional treatment trial for Stroke focused on measuring Robotic, Stroke, Upper Limb Rehabilitation

Eligibility Criteria

18 Years - 80 Years (Adult, Older Adult)All SexesDoes not accept healthy volunteers

Inclusion Criteria:

  • The clinical diagnosis of stroke
  • post stroke hemiparesis
  • maximum six months from stroke
  • stability of the clinical picture at the time of roll-in
  • minimum level of upper arm motility (>2) movement against gravity
  • trunk control and ability to maintain sitting position for at least 120 minutes

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Hemiplegia of other aetiology ( neurodegenerative, neoplastic)
  • Presence of articular ankyloses, spasms and/or severe muscle spasticity with complete loss of movement in any of the three major joints
  • Instability of upper limb bone (not consolidated fractures)
  • Presence of cognitive impairment (MMSE<=21) and/or psychiatric disease
  • Concomitant disease that could prevent the rehabilitation program (respiratory failure, heart failure, osteomyelitis, thrombophlebitis and other clinical condition that are against rehabilitation treatment)
  • Ulcer sores that can contraindicate the use to ARMEO Spring
  • Ashworth > 3 (for each of the three upper limb joints)

Sites / Locations

  • Habilita, Sarnico's Hospital

Arms of the Study

Arm 1

Arm 2

Arm Type

Experimental

Active Comparator

Arm Label

Armeo Spring

Control Group

Arm Description

All patients of experimental group were treated according to an established protocol for ARMEO Spring. In the first session the device was adjusted for patients arms. The physiotherapist controlled functional space of upper limb movement and correct position of working station. Each training session consisted of two parts with 30 minutes per session with "Armeo Spring" and 30 minutes per session with conventional treatment 5 days per week, for 6 weeks.

The conventional treatment, under control of physiotherapist, consists of passive and active assisted mobilization of the upper limbs traditional training based on the Bobath concept (neuromuscular facilitation, postural control and proprioception exercises, verticalization and gait training). Each training session consisted of 60 minutes with conventional treatment 5 days per week, for 6 weeks in a control group. The conventional session in the experimental group lasted 30 minutes with the same techniques and methods.

Outcomes

Primary Outcome Measures

Change in Functional Independence Measure - FIM
All patients were evaluated by a blinded observer using the outcomes tests at enrollment (T0), after the treatment (T1) and at follow up 6 weeks later (T2). Investigators assessed the impact on functional recovery (Functional Independence Measure - FIM scale).
Change in strength (ARM Motricity Index-MI)
All patients were evaluated by a blinded observer using the outcomes tests at enrollment (T0), after the treatment (T1) and at follow up 6 weeks later (T2). Investigators assessed the impact on strength (ARM Motricity Index-MI)

Secondary Outcome Measures

Change in spasticity (Modified Ashworth Scale-MAS)
All patients were evaluated by a blinded observer using the outcomes tests at enrollment (T0), after the treatment (T1) and at follow up 6 weeks later (T2). Investigators assessed the impact on spasticity (Modified Ashworth Scale-MAS)
Change in pain (Numeric Rating Pain Scale -NRPS)
All patients were evaluated by a blinded observer using the outcomes tests at enrollment (T0), after the treatment (T1) and at follow up 6 weeks later (T2). Investigators assessed the impact on pain (Numeric Rating Pain Scale -NRPS)

Full Information

First Posted
March 1, 2016
Last Updated
March 22, 2016
Sponsor
Habilita S.p.A.
search

1. Study Identification

Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT02721212
Brief Title
Impact of a New Technology to Functional Recovery Upper Limb in Post Stroke Patients.
Official Title
Impact of a New Technology to Functional Recovery Upper Limb in Post Stroke Patients: a Randomized Controlled Study
Study Type
Interventional

2. Study Status

Record Verification Date
March 2016
Overall Recruitment Status
Unknown status
Study Start Date
March 2016 (undefined)
Primary Completion Date
May 2016 (Anticipated)
Study Completion Date
May 2016 (Anticipated)

3. Sponsor/Collaborators

Responsible Party, by Official Title
Principal Investigator
Name of the Sponsor
Habilita S.p.A.

4. Oversight

Data Monitoring Committee
Yes

5. Study Description

Brief Summary
54 inpatients participants were randomly divided into two groups (experimental and conventional). Individual of experimental group were treated according to an established protocol for ARMEO Spring (30 minutes/session with "Armeo Spring" and 30 minutes/session with conventional treatment 5 days/week for 6 weeks). The conventional treatment consists of passive and active assisted mobilization of the upper limbs, traditional training based on the Bobath concept. Inpatients of control group were treated with conventional treatment with training session of 60 minutes 5 days/week for 6 weeks. All patients were evaluated by a blinded observer using the outcomes tests at enrollment (T0), after the treatment (T1) and at follow up 6 weeks later (T2). We assessed the impact on functional recovery (Functional Independence Measure - FIM scale), strength (ARM Motricity Index-MI), spasticity (Modified Ashworth Scale-MAS) and pain (Numeric Rating Pain Scale -NRPS).
Detailed Description
Authors conducted a double blind randomized controlled trial. Informed consent was obtained from all participants and procedures were conducted according to the Declaration of Helsinki. The protocol (N° U0074917/11110) was approved by the Local Ethical Committee of Bergamo, Italy. A number of clinical trials have shown significant advances in upper limb recovery with the use of different sensory - motor techniques, including intensive repetitive movement, constraint-induced movement therapy, functional electrical stimulation treatment, the use of robot-assisted therapy in association with virtual reality. Robot-assisted virtual reality intervention has been shown more effective than conventional interventions and achieved more improvement in upper limb function, however the effect size reported by recent reviews was small and this datum is always reported as a cost-benefit ratio to challenge the use of virtual reality technology in rehabilitation. Robot aided rehabilitation is increasingly used in stroke rehabilitation, with a broad spectrum of applied technology from motor to non-motor aided systems, posing the problem to match the clinical need of the patient with the proper device. In the immediate post stroke period the motor recovery usually do not allow the use of non-motored robot device while the use of motored robot aid after months can be too delayed to obtain some valuable clinical results. The wide range of available devices are certainly a richness in the clinical possibility but also a critical factor in selecting a suitable technology tailored for the clinical feature of the patient at the actual state of the art. This can affect the comparison and interpretation of the literature so far published. Virtual reality therapy recreates favorable conditions to motor learning. Functional recovery is achieved through use-dependent cortical reorganization. The time/intensity of its application is therefore a pivotal point in this learning process. Its duration is not standardized and can varies from 3-4 to 20 hours of total treatment making results accordingly variable, adding further bias in data interpretation. A prerequisite to gain the best results is patients selection and early application when is possible.All these factors, have been ascribed as possible causes of small effect size reported in recent literature in comparing robot-aided virtual reality rehabilitation versus traditional rehabilitation alone.In a group of patients with hemiparesis following stroke, we compared the efficacy of a neurorehabilitation program consist of combination of non-motor robot-assisted therapy with virtual reality (Armeo®Spring) to conventional therapy with the primary aim to verify if the punctual application of what suggested by the single papers is able to improve differences of the efficacy between treatments and, therefore, creating a better effect size. And, as a secondary arm, if it is possible to improve the clinical picture also in post-acute stroke patients and as a secondary aim, if motor selection and intensive treatments can improve the small effect size reported by the literature.

6. Conditions and Keywords

Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Stroke
Keywords
Robotic, Stroke, Upper Limb Rehabilitation

7. Study Design

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

8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions

Arm Title
Armeo Spring
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
All patients of experimental group were treated according to an established protocol for ARMEO Spring. In the first session the device was adjusted for patients arms. The physiotherapist controlled functional space of upper limb movement and correct position of working station. Each training session consisted of two parts with 30 minutes per session with "Armeo Spring" and 30 minutes per session with conventional treatment 5 days per week, for 6 weeks.
Arm Title
Control Group
Arm Type
Active Comparator
Arm Description
The conventional treatment, under control of physiotherapist, consists of passive and active assisted mobilization of the upper limbs traditional training based on the Bobath concept (neuromuscular facilitation, postural control and proprioception exercises, verticalization and gait training). Each training session consisted of 60 minutes with conventional treatment 5 days per week, for 6 weeks in a control group. The conventional session in the experimental group lasted 30 minutes with the same techniques and methods.
Intervention Type
Device
Intervention Name(s)
Armeo Spring
Intervention Description
All patients of experimental group were treated according to an established protocol for ARMEO Spring. In the first session the device was adjusted for patients arms. The physiotherapist controlled functional space of upper limb movement and correct position of working station. Each training session consisted of two parts with 30 minutes per session with "Armeo Spring" and 30 minutes per session with conventional treatment 5 days per week, for 6 weeks.
Intervention Type
Other
Intervention Name(s)
Conventional Rehabilitation
Intervention Description
The conventional treatment, under control of physiotherapist, consists of passive and active assisted mobilization of the upper limbs traditional training based on the Bobath concept (neuromuscular facilitation, postural control and proprioception exercises, verticalization and gait training). Each training session consisted of 60 minutes with conventional treatment 5 days per week, for 6 weeks in a control group. The conventional session in the experimental group lasted 30 minutes with the same techniques and methods.
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Change in Functional Independence Measure - FIM
Description
All patients were evaluated by a blinded observer using the outcomes tests at enrollment (T0), after the treatment (T1) and at follow up 6 weeks later (T2). Investigators assessed the impact on functional recovery (Functional Independence Measure - FIM scale).
Time Frame
From baseline (T0) to 6 weeks (T1) and 12 weeks (T2)
Title
Change in strength (ARM Motricity Index-MI)
Description
All patients were evaluated by a blinded observer using the outcomes tests at enrollment (T0), after the treatment (T1) and at follow up 6 weeks later (T2). Investigators assessed the impact on strength (ARM Motricity Index-MI)
Time Frame
From baseline (T0) to 6 weeks (T1) and 12 weeks (T2)
Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Change in spasticity (Modified Ashworth Scale-MAS)
Description
All patients were evaluated by a blinded observer using the outcomes tests at enrollment (T0), after the treatment (T1) and at follow up 6 weeks later (T2). Investigators assessed the impact on spasticity (Modified Ashworth Scale-MAS)
Time Frame
From baseline (T0) to 6 weeks (T1) and 12 weeks (T2)
Title
Change in pain (Numeric Rating Pain Scale -NRPS)
Description
All patients were evaluated by a blinded observer using the outcomes tests at enrollment (T0), after the treatment (T1) and at follow up 6 weeks later (T2). Investigators assessed the impact on pain (Numeric Rating Pain Scale -NRPS)
Time Frame
From baseline (T0) to 6 weeks (T1) and 12 weeks (T2)

10. Eligibility

Sex
All
Minimum Age & Unit of Time
18 Years
Maximum Age & Unit of Time
80 Years
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria: The clinical diagnosis of stroke post stroke hemiparesis maximum six months from stroke stability of the clinical picture at the time of roll-in minimum level of upper arm motility (>2) movement against gravity trunk control and ability to maintain sitting position for at least 120 minutes Exclusion Criteria: Hemiplegia of other aetiology ( neurodegenerative, neoplastic) Presence of articular ankyloses, spasms and/or severe muscle spasticity with complete loss of movement in any of the three major joints Instability of upper limb bone (not consolidated fractures) Presence of cognitive impairment (MMSE<=21) and/or psychiatric disease Concomitant disease that could prevent the rehabilitation program (respiratory failure, heart failure, osteomyelitis, thrombophlebitis and other clinical condition that are against rehabilitation treatment) Ulcer sores that can contraindicate the use to ARMEO Spring Ashworth > 3 (for each of the three upper limb joints)
Central Contact Person:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name or Official Title & Degree
Lorena Salvi, Vice Coord.
Phone
+39035918
Ext
293
Email
salvi.lorena@gmail.com
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name or Official Title & Degree
Chiara Mulè, Coordinator
Phone
+39035918
Ext
293
Email
chiaramule@habilita.it
Overall Study Officials:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Giovanni Taveggia, MD
Organizational Affiliation
Habilita S.p.A.
Official's Role
Principal Investigator
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Roberto Casale, MD
Organizational Affiliation
Habilita S.p.A.
Official's Role
Study Director
Facility Information:
Facility Name
Habilita, Sarnico's Hospital
City
Sarnico
State/Province
Bergamo
ZIP/Postal Code
24067
Country
Italy
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Giovanni Taveggia, MD
Phone
+39035918
Ext
293
Email
giovannitaveggia@habilitasarnico.it
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Chiara Mulè, MD
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Stefania Fogliaresi, PT
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Lorena Salvi, PT
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Alberto Borboni, PhD, Eng
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Roberto Casale, MD
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Giovanni Taveggia, MD

12. IPD Sharing Statement

Plan to Share IPD
Yes
Citations:
PubMed Identifier
25744519
Citation
Kernan WN, Ovbiagele B, Kittner SJ; Secondary Prevention Guideline Writing Group. Response to letter regarding article, "Guidelines for the prevention of stroke in patients with stroke and transient ischemic attack: a guideline for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association". Stroke. 2015 Apr;46(4):e87-9. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.115.008661. Epub 2015 Mar 5. No abstract available.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
24788967
Citation
Kernan WN, Ovbiagele B, Black HR, Bravata DM, Chimowitz MI, Ezekowitz MD, Fang MC, Fisher M, Furie KL, Heck DV, Johnston SC, Kasner SE, Kittner SJ, Mitchell PH, Rich MW, Richardson D, Schwamm LH, Wilson JA; American Heart Association Stroke Council, Council on Cardiovascular and Stroke Nursing, Council on Clinical Cardiology, and Council on Peripheral Vascular Disease. Guidelines for the prevention of stroke in patients with stroke and transient ischemic attack: a guideline for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke. 2014 Jul;45(7):2160-236. doi: 10.1161/STR.0000000000000024. Epub 2014 May 1. Erratum In: Stroke. 2015 Feb;46(2):e54.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
22727271
Citation
Colomer C, Baldovi A, Torrome S, Navarro MD, Moliner B, Ferri J, Noe E. Efficacy of Armeo(R) Spring during the chronic phase of stroke. Study in mild to moderate cases of hemiparesis. Neurologia. 2013 Jun;28(5):261-7. doi: 10.1016/j.nrl.2012.04.017. Epub 2012 Jun 23. English, Spanish.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
15458061
Citation
Boian R, Sharma A, Han C, Merians A, Burdea G, Adamovich S, Recce M, Tremaine M, Poizner H. Virtual reality-based post-stroke hand rehabilitation. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2002;85:64-70.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
21674385
Citation
Brokaw EB, Murray T, Nef T, Lum PS. Retraining of interjoint arm coordination after stroke using robot-assisted time-independent functional training. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2011;48(4):299-316. doi: 10.1682/jrrd.2010.04.0064.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
7650532
Citation
Butefisch C, Hummelsheim H, Denzler P, Mauritz KH. Repetitive training of isolated movements improves the outcome of motor rehabilitation of the centrally paretic hand. J Neurol Sci. 1995 May;130(1):59-68. doi: 10.1016/0022-510x(95)00003-k.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
17077374
Citation
Wolf SL, Winstein CJ, Miller JP, Taub E, Uswatte G, Morris D, Giuliani C, Light KE, Nichols-Larsen D; EXCITE Investigators. Effect of constraint-induced movement therapy on upper extremity function 3 to 9 months after stroke: the EXCITE randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2006 Nov 1;296(17):2095-104. doi: 10.1001/jama.296.17.2095.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
18812432
Citation
Knutson JS, Hisel TZ, Harley MY, Chae J. A novel functional electrical stimulation treatment for recovery of hand function in hemiplegia: 12-week pilot study. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2009 Jan;23(1):17-25. doi: 10.1177/1545968308317577. Epub 2008 Sep 23.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
25012864
Citation
Basteris A, Nijenhuis SM, Stienen AH, Buurke JH, Prange GB, Amirabdollahian F. Training modalities in robot-mediated upper limb rehabilitation in stroke: a framework for classification based on a systematic review. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2014 Jul 10;11:111. doi: 10.1186/1743-0003-11-111.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
25927099
Citation
Laver KE, George S, Thomas S, Deutsch JE, Crotty M. Virtual reality for stroke rehabilitation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Feb 12;2015(2):CD008349. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008349.pub3.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
11989512
Citation
Tesio L, Granger CV, Perucca L, Franchignoni FP, Battaglia MA, Russell CF. The FIM instrument in the United States and Italy: a comparative study. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2002 Mar;81(3):168-76. doi: 10.1097/00002060-200203000-00003.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
15241758
Citation
Fasoli SE, Krebs HI, Stein J, Frontera WR, Hughes R, Hogan N. Robotic therapy for chronic motor impairments after stroke: Follow-up results. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004 Jul;85(7):1106-11. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2003.11.028.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
25135003
Citation
Kim YJ, Ku J, Cho S, Kim HJ, Cho YK, Lim T, Kang YJ. Facilitation of corticospinal excitability by virtual reality exercise following anodal transcranial direct current stimulation in healthy volunteers and subacute stroke subjects. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2014 Aug 18;11:124. doi: 10.1186/1743-0003-11-124.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
24529594
Citation
Teasell RW, Murie Fernandez M, McIntyre A, Mehta S. Rethinking the continuum of stroke rehabilitation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2014 Apr;95(4):595-6. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2013.11.014. Epub 2014 Feb 14.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
12098155
Citation
Lum PS, Burgar CG, Shor PC, Majmundar M, Van der Loos M. Robot-assisted movement training compared with conventional therapy techniques for the rehabilitation of upper-limb motor function after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2002 Jul;83(7):952-9. doi: 10.1053/apmr.2001.33101.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
23968362
Citation
Demain S, Burridge J, Ellis-Hill C, Hughes AM, Yardley L, Tedesco-Triccas L, Swain I. Assistive technologies after stroke: self-management or fending for yourself? A focus group study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2013 Aug 22;13:334. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-13-334.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
15502272
Citation
Kwakkel G, Kollen B, Lindeman E. Understanding the pattern of functional recovery after stroke: facts and theories. Restor Neurol Neurosci. 2004;22(3-5):281-99.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
10759179
Citation
Ridding MC, Brouwer B, Miles TS, Pitcher JB, Thompson PD. Changes in muscle responses to stimulation of the motor cortex induced by peripheral nerve stimulation in human subjects. Exp Brain Res. 2000 Mar;131(1):135-43. doi: 10.1007/s002219900269.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
15502265
Citation
Rossini PM, Dal Forno G. Neuronal post-stroke plasticity in the adult. Restor Neurol Neurosci. 2004;22(3-5):193-206.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
17261749
Citation
Nudo RJ. Postinfarct cortical plasticity and behavioral recovery. Stroke. 2007 Feb;38(2 Suppl):840-5. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.0000247943.12887.d2.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
26003014
Citation
Villafane JH, Valdes K, Anselmi F, Pirali C, Negrini S. The diagnostic accuracy of five tests for diagnosing partial-thickness tears of the supraspinatus tendon: A cohort study. J Hand Ther. 2015 Jul-Sep;28(3):247-51; quiz 252. doi: 10.1016/j.jht.2015.01.011. Epub 2015 Feb 19.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
16847784
Citation
Prange GB, Jannink MJ, Groothuis-Oudshoorn CG, Hermens HJ, Ijzerman MJ. Systematic review of the effect of robot-aided therapy on recovery of the hemiparetic arm after stroke. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2006 Mar-Apr;43(2):171-84. doi: 10.1682/jrrd.2005.04.0076.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
12615644
Citation
Lotze M, Braun C, Birbaumer N, Anders S, Cohen LG. Motor learning elicited by voluntary drive. Brain. 2003 Apr;126(Pt 4):866-72. doi: 10.1093/brain/awg079.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
18156154
Citation
Takahashi CD, Der-Yeghiaian L, Le V, Motiwala RR, Cramer SC. Robot-based hand motor therapy after stroke. Brain. 2008 Feb;131(Pt 2):425-37. doi: 10.1093/brain/awm311. Epub 2007 Dec 20.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
11956348
Citation
Kaelin-Lang A, Luft AR, Sawaki L, Burstein AH, Sohn YH, Cohen LG. Modulation of human corticomotor excitability by somatosensory input. J Physiol. 2002 Apr 15;540(Pt 2):623-33. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.2001.012801.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
23449315
Citation
Villafane JH, Silva GB, Chiarotto A, Ragusa OL. Botulinum toxin type A combined with neurodynamic mobilization for upper limb spasticity after stroke: a case report. J Chiropr Med. 2012 Sep;11(3):186-91. doi: 10.1016/j.jcm.2012.05.009.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
19841827
Citation
Posteraro F, Mazzoleni S, Aliboni S, Cesqui B, Battaglia A, Dario P, Micera S. Robot-mediated therapy for paretic upper limb of chronic patients following neurological injury. J Rehabil Med. 2009 Nov;41(12):976-80. doi: 10.2340/16501977-0403.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
23000090
Citation
Daviet JC, Bonan I, Caire JM, Colle F, Damamme L, Froger J, Leblond C, Leger A, Muller F, Simon O, Thiebaut M, Yelnik A. Therapeutic patient education for stroke survivors: Non-pharmacological management. A literature review. Ann Phys Rehabil Med. 2012 Dec;55(9-10):641-56. doi: 10.1016/j.rehab.2012.08.011. Epub 2012 Sep 7. English, French.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
17270510
Citation
Masiero S, Celia A, Rosati G, Armani M. Robotic-assisted rehabilitation of the upper limb after acute stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2007 Feb;88(2):142-9. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2006.10.032.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
23480975
Citation
Invernizzi M, Negrini S, Carda S, Lanzotti L, Cisari C, Baricich A. The value of adding mirror therapy for upper limb motor recovery of subacute stroke patients: a randomized controlled trial. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2013 Jun;49(3):311-7. Epub 2013 Mar 13.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
15366258
Citation
Hess G. Synaptic plasticity of local connections in rat motor cortex. Acta Neurobiol Exp (Wars). 2004;64(2):271-6.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
16271575
Citation
Jang SH, You SH, Hallett M, Cho YW, Park CM, Cho SH, Lee HY, Kim TH. Cortical reorganization and associated functional motor recovery after virtual reality in patients with chronic stroke: an experimenter-blind preliminary study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005 Nov;86(11):2218-23. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2005.04.015.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
15890990
Citation
You SH, Jang SH, Kim YH, Hallett M, Ahn SH, Kwon YH, Kim JH, Lee MY. Virtual reality-induced cortical reorganization and associated locomotor recovery in chronic stroke: an experimenter-blind randomized study. Stroke. 2005 Jun;36(6):1166-71. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.0000162715.43417.91. Epub 2005 May 12. Erratum In: Stroke. 2005 Jul;36(7):1625.
Results Reference
result

Learn more about this trial

Impact of a New Technology to Functional Recovery Upper Limb in Post Stroke Patients.

We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs