CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT02092662AssStrFuncUpdated Aug 6, 2015Results posted

Objective Assessment of Upper Extremity Functioning of Stroke Patients Before and After Rehabilitation

An observational study in Stroke, sponsored by Carmeli Eli. Completed at 1 site in Israel. Open to participants aged 30 Years to 90 Years, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2015-08-06.

Sponsored by Carmeli Eli · Observational

Study type
Observational
Model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
57
Ages
30 Years to 90 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The purpose of this study is to evaluate by objective measures the improvement in upper extremity functioning, as reflection of motor learning, in stroke patients in the sub acute phase. The investigators hypothesize that the improvements in daily functioning are partially due to compensation strategies and partially due to motor learning.

Read the detailed description

Background: Most stroke patients continue to suffer from upper extremity motor deficiencies even after prolonged and intense rehabilitation in hospital. Even though guidelines and other studies recommend to apply a rehabilitation programs as patient reception. As opposed to that there is a scarce evidence for the efficacy of the rehabilitation.

Objectives: To evaluate by objective measures the improvement in motor performance of the upper extremity of stroke patients in the sub acute period. Secondary objective is to describe the correlation between proximal and distal motor deficiencies of the upper extremity.

Hypothesis: Patients will show better hand performance at the end of hospitalization. Part of it can be attributed to the rehabilitation and part to a spontaneous recovery. Correlation will be found for proximal and distal upper extremity motor deficiencies.

Methods:

Trial began only after the IRB research approval. All treatment sessions will implemented by the physical and occupational staff of the hospital. Assessments for the measures will be carry out by a certified physical therapist which is coinvestigator. The coinvestigator collect the raw data for analysis in Excel and than in SPSS.

20 stroke patients who meet the inclusion criteria will participate in the study, after signing an informed consent.Patients will undergo the first assessment of all measures, e.g: motor abilities by Fugl-Meyer test, handwriting kinematic and kinetic measures and surface electromyography for measurement of muscle synergy.Patients will be treated by standard rehabilitation of physical and occupational therapy for a period of 3-4 weeks. Before discharge from hospital patients will undergo another assessment of all measures, in order to evaluate the progression in their upper limb motor abilities from reception. Part of the patients will be assessed again two to three weeks after discharge as follow up.

Outcome Measures: upper limb Fugl-Meyer assessment, handwriting Air-time, pressure and velocity, EMG (i.e., muscle onset, muscle amplitude, muscle co-activation ratio).

Statistical analysis: ANOVA analysis will be used to measure time effect. Correlation between measures will be measured by Pearson's correlation. Sample size (n=20) was calculated based on 5 points improvement in Fugl-Meyer test as minimal significant change with power of 0.8 and p-level under 0.05 for significance.

Key words: Stroke, Muscle synergy, Handwriting, Fugl-Meyer

02

Conditions studied

  • Stroke

Browse trials for

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 57 is below the median of 160 across 1,692 observational studies indexed under Stroke.

Browse Stroke studies →

Lead sponsor

This is the only study on the registry with Carmeli Eli as lead sponsor.

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

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
30 Years to 90 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes
Sampling method
Non-probability sample

Study population

Cohort will be selected from Fliman Rehabilitation Geriatric Center. Healthy subjects, age and gender-matched will be served as a control group.

Inclusion criteria

  • diagnosis of cerebral stroke with upper extremity hemiparesis
  • Ability to understand simple orders

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Other orthopedic pathology
  • Apraxia
  • Bilateral Paresis
  • Other neurologic pathology
  • sensory aphasia
05

Study design

Observational model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
57 participants (actual)
Target follow-up
5 Weeks
Patient registry
Yes

Groups and cohorts

  • Stroke

    Stroke patients at the subacute phase

    Other: stroke

  • Healthy controls

    healthy age-matched voluntiers

    Other: Healthy controls

Interventions

  • Otherstroke

    task-oriented therapy: physical and occupational therapy emphasizing integration of the patients needs, environment and context

  • OtherHealthy controls

    no treatment

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Fugl-Meyer Assessment.

    zero to 66 points scale, measuring the impairment level of the upper extremity. Zero indicates a high level of impairment or minimum hand motor function, while 66 points indicates an increased motor function which is similar to normal upper extremity function.

    Time frame: T1 at the beginning of the hospital stay and folloew up at T2 one month later.

  2. Muscle Onset Time.

    Assessed by surface electromyography device. The time period it takes the muscle to be activated and contract from a voice prompting is measured. Shorter time onset probably charcterized healthy people compared to patients after a stroke.

    Time frame: the study group was assessed T1 at the beginning of the hospital stay and follow up at T2 one month later. The control group assessed for the the time onset and compared to the study group at T1

Secondary outcomes

  1. Muscle Co-activation Index.

    Assessed by surface electromyography device. Indicate for the level by which muscles contract at the same time and amplitude. It will be calculated in percentage from 100%, as 100% indicate for complete co-activation between a pair of muscles.

    Time frame: T1 at the beginning of the hospital stay and folloew up at T2 one month later.

  2. Handwriting Velocity

    Assessed by electronic tablet with specific software called ComPET. Patient make writing tasks. The velocity of his writing is measured and pass from the tablet to the computer to be processed by the software.

    Time frame: T1 at the beginning of the hospital stay and follow up at T2 one month later.

  3. % Maximum Voluntary Contraction.

    T1 at the beginning of the hospital stay and folloew up at T2 one month later.

    Time frame: The outcome will be measured twice. First at the beginning of the hospital stay and again at the end of the hospital stay, that is 4 weeks on average.

  4. Handwriting Pressure.

    Assessed by electronic tablet with specific software called ComPET. Patient make writing tasks, and the pressure exerted with the pen on the tablet is recorded. The data from the tablet passed to the computer to be processed by the software.

    Time frame: T1 at the beginning of the hospital stay and folloew up at T2 one mont...

  5. Handwriting Off-paper Time.

    Assessed by electronic tablet with specific software called ComPET. Patient make writing tasks. The time the pen is on air is measured. The data from the tablet passed to the computer to be processed by the software.

    Time frame: T1 at the beginning of the hospital stay and folloew up at T2 one mont...

07

Results

Posted Aug 6, 2015

Participant flow

Participant flow — Overall Study
MilestonePatients After a StrokeControl
Started3819
Recruited3819
Completed2519
Not completed130
Withdrew: Lost to follow-up130

Outcome measures

PrimaryFugl-Meyer Assessment.

zero to 66 points scale, measuring the impairment level of the upper extremity. Zero indicates a high level of impairment or minimum hand motor function, while 66 points indicates an increased motor function which is similar to normal upper extremity function.

Time frame:
T1 at the beginning of the hospital stay and folloew up at T2 one month later.
Reported as:
Mean · units on a scale
Fugl-Meyer Assessment.
units on a scaleStudy Group (T1)Control
Fugl-Meyer assessment score (T1)38.32 ± 13.77NA ± NA
Fugl-Meyer assessment score (T2)47.6 ± 11.06NA ± NA
SecondaryMuscle Co-activation Index.

Assessed by surface electromyography device. Indicate for the level by which muscles contract at the same time and amplitude. It will be calculated in percentage from 100%, as 100% indicate for complete co-activation between a pair of muscles.

Time frame:
T1 at the beginning of the hospital stay and folloew up at T2 one month later.

Results for this outcome have not been posted.

SecondaryHandwriting Velocity

Assessed by electronic tablet with specific software called ComPET. Patient make writing tasks. The velocity of his writing is measured and pass from the tablet to the computer to be processed by the software.

Time frame:
T1 at the beginning of the hospital stay and follow up at T2 one month later.

Results for this outcome have not been posted.

PrimaryMuscle Onset Time.

Assessed by surface electromyography device. The time period it takes the muscle to be activated and contract from a voice prompting is measured. Shorter time onset probably charcterized healthy people compared to patients after a stroke.

Time frame:
the study group was assessed T1 at the beginning of the hospital stay and follow up at T2 one month later. The control group assessed for the the time onset and compared to the study group at T1
Reported as:
Mean · seconds
Muscle Onset Time.
secondsStrokeHealthy Controls
Deltoid T1 assessment1.33 ± 0.70.79 ± 0.32
Deltoid T2 assessment0.9 ± 0.38NA ± NA
Trapezius T1 assessment1.09 ± 0.460.79 ± 0.3
Trapezius T2 assessment0.8 ± 0.36NA ± NA
Biceps T1 assessment1.37 ± 0.70.79 ± 0.31
Biceps T2 assessment0.82 ± 0.4NA ± NA
TricepsT1 assessment0.91 ± 0.810.72 ± 0.64
Triceps T2 assessment1.12 ± 0.74NA ± NA
Secondary% Maximum Voluntary Contraction.

T1 at the beginning of the hospital stay and folloew up at T2 one month later.

Time frame:
The outcome will be measured twice. First at the beginning of the hospital stay and again at the end of the hospital stay, that is 4 weeks on average.

Results for this outcome have not been posted.

SecondaryHandwriting Pressure.

Assessed by electronic tablet with specific software called ComPET. Patient make writing tasks, and the pressure exerted with the pen on the tablet is recorded. The data from the tablet passed to the computer to be processed by the software.

Time frame:
T1 at the beginning of the hospital stay and folloew up at T2 one mont...

Results for this outcome have not been posted.

SecondaryHandwriting Off-paper Time.

Assessed by electronic tablet with specific software called ComPET. Patient make writing tasks. The time the pen is on air is measured. The data from the tablet passed to the computer to be processed by the software.

Time frame:
T1 at the beginning of the hospital stay and folloew up at T2 one mont...

Results for this outcome have not been posted.

Adverse events

Collected over THere were no adverse events in the study. Non-serious events are listed at a 0% frequency threshold.

Adverse event summary by group
GroupDeathsSeriousOther
Study—0/57 (0%)0/57 (0%)

Baseline characteristics

groups were matched by age (p\>0.1)

Age, Categorical
Age, Categorical(Participants)StudyControlTotal
<=18 years000
Between 18 and 65 years437
>=65 years341650
Age, Continuous
Age, Continuous(years)StudyControlTotal
Mean75.15 ± 8.6971 ± 10.5874 ± 9.4
Sex: Female, Male
Sex: Female, Male(Participants)StudyControlTotal
Female131124
Male25833
Region of Enrollment
Region of Enrollment(participants)StudyControlTotal
Israel381957
08

Study locations

1 site
  • Fliman Geriatric Rehabilitation Center
    Haifa, 31021, Israel
09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Aug 6, 2015, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT02092662
Lead sponsor
Carmeli Eli
Responsible party
Carmeli Eli (Professor, University of Haifa) — Sponsor-investigator
First posted
Mar 20, 2014
Start date
Jan 2014
Primary completion
Apr 2015
Completion
May 2015
Results posted
Aug 6, 2015
Last update
Aug 6, 2015

Study contacts

Emanuel Markovich, MD
principal investigator · Fliman Geriatric Rehabilitation Center
Sharon Israely, MSc.
study director · University of Haifa
Eli Carmeli, PhD.
study chair · University of Hifa

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Jun 2015. 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