CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT01818349Updated Mar 26, 2013

Impact of Training on Gait and Strength in Stroke Survivors

An interventional study of isokinetic lower-limb training and isokinetic upper-limb training in Stroke, sponsored by Université de Montréal. Completed at 1 site in Canada. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2013-03-26.

Sponsored by Université de Montréal · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
30
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Background: A discrepancy between strength gain and gait changes following various training programs aimed at improving gait function after stroke has been noted. A mismatch between the training program and gait parameters could explain this finding.

Objective: To evaluate the impact of an isokinetic-strengthening program, matching the requirements of the affected lower-limb muscle groups involved in the energy generation of gait, to a control intervention, on gait performance and muscle strength.

Hypothesis: The isokinetic training program of the affected lower-limb muscles would produce greater changes in gait performance and strength than a control intervention not aiming at training these muscle groups.

Design: Single-blinded randomized controlled trial.

Participants: A convenient sample of 30 individuals with chronic hemiparesis.

Interventions: Participants were randomly assigned into two groups (n=15), each training three times/week for six weeks. The experimental group trained the affected plantarflexors, hip flexors and extensors concentrically, while the control group trained the affected upper-limb muscles.

Main outcome measures: Baseline values and post-training values, taken at the end of the training program, of maximal voluntary concentric strength, gait speed and peak positive power.

02

Conditions studied

  • Stroke

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • stroke
  • exercise
  • muscle strength
  • gait
  • rehabilitation
03

In context

Stroke

7,286 studies on the registry are indexed under Stroke; 2,007 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 30 is below the median of 50 across 5,369 interventional studies indexed under Stroke.

Browse Stroke studies →

Lead sponsor

Université de Montréal is the lead sponsor of 97 studies on the registry; 11 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • have a chronic (six months or more) unilateral stroke
  • be able to walk 10 meters independently with or without a cane
  • present residual weakness at the affected lower limb
  • have an activity tolerance of at least two hours with a rest period

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • receptive aphasia
  • incontinence
  • unstable medical condition
  • history of injury
  • anesthesia at the lower limbs
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Single (Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
30 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Active comparator
    isokinetic lower-limb training

    3 times/week for 6 weeks

    Other: isokinetic lower-limb training

  • Placebo comparator
    isokinetic uppe-limb training

    3 times/week for 6 weeks

    Other: isokinetic upper-limb training

Interventions

  • Otherisokinetic lower-limb training

    concentric training of the affected plantarflexors, hip flexors and hip extensors

  • Otherisokinetic upper-limb training

    concentric training of the affected wrist extensors, elbow flexors and shoulder flexors

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. change in gait speed

    change in gait speed, in meter/second, was assessed as the difference between the baseline and week #7 values.

    Time frame: gait speed was assessed at baseline and at the completion of the 6-week training (i.e. week #7)

  2. change in peak positive power

    peak positive power was evaluated at the affected plantarflexors, hip flexors and hip extensors. Also, change in peak positive power, in weight/kilogram, was assessed as the difference between the baseline and week #7 values.

    Time frame: peak positive power was assessed at baseline and at the completion of the 6-week training (i.e. week #7)

Secondary outcomes

  1. change in maximal voluntary concentric strength

    maximal voluntary concentric strength was evaluated at the affected plantarflexors, hip flexors and hip extensors. Also, change in maximal voluntary concentric strength, in Newton-metre, was assessed as the difference between the baseline and week #7 values.

    Time frame: maximal voluntary concentric strength was assessed at baseline and at the completion of the 6-week training (i.e. week #7)

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Institut de réadaptation Gingras-Lindsay
    Montréal, Quebec H3S 1M9, Canada
08

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Mar 26, 2013, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
09

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT01818349
Lead sponsor
Université de Montréal
Collaborators
Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR)
Responsible party
Marie-hélène Milot (professor, Université de Montréal) — Principal investigator
First posted
Mar 26, 2013
Start date
Mar 2002
Primary completion
Dec 2005
Completion
Dec 2007
Last update
Mar 26, 2013

Study contacts

Sylvie Nadeau, PhD
principal investigator · Université de Montréal

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Mar 2013. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion