ClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT03282422Updated Jul 17, 2019

Effectiveness of the Functional Hand Splint and Specific Tasks in the Domiciliary Environment Applied to Children With Unilateral Cerebral Palsy

An interventional study of Home-based protocol in specific tasks and Upper-limb splint in Hemiplegia and Hemiparesis and Cerebral Palsy Infantile, sponsored by Universidad San Jorge. Completed at 2 sites in Spain. Open to participants aged 5 Years to 12 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2019-07-17.

Sponsored by Universidad San Jorge · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
33
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
5 Years to 12 Years
Sex
All
01

Where this study stands

Counted across the records on this site · 2026-11-12

Among 16 studies in Hemiplegia with a site in Spain — 2 open to participants now, 2 under way, none of them phase 3. Hemiplegia · Spain.

Enrollment
7th of 16
33 · median 25
Started
2017
with 1 other
No phase
15 of 16
2 open now
Registered
3rd of 16
by date
Lead sponsor
1 of 16
Universidad San Jorge

Among the 16 studies in Hemiplegia with a site in Spain, this one is the 7th largest by enrollment, is one of 2 that started in 2017, is one of 15 with no phase, and was the 3rd registered.

Hemiplegia

446 studies on the registry are indexed under Hemiplegia; 90 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 33 is close to the median of 34 across 370 interventional studies indexed under Hemiplegia.

Browse Hemiplegia studies →

Open to participants now

2 of the 16 studies in Hemiplegia with a site in Spain are open now, in 3 countries. Each count lists the studies.

All 2 open studies →

Where they have run

Who these studies take

Of the 57 Hemiplegia studies recruiting now, 16 (28%) set no upper age limit and 29 (51%) stop at 75 or younger; 8 take children under 18; 7 take healthy volunteers.

This study: 5 Years to 12 Years · all sexes · no healthy volunteers.

The full table on the hub →
Was this useful?
Watch this landscapeDownload CSVNarrow it in search →With an account: a weekly mail of what changed among 16 studies in Hemiplegia with a site in Spain, or all of them as a file.
02

Study summary

The main objective:

To determine the effectiveness of a treatment that combines the application of a functional upper limb orthosis together with a home-based program of specific tasks in children with unilateral cerebral palsy versus a home-based program of specific tasks in improving structure and function, activity and participation.

Hypothesis:

The application of a functional upper limb orthosis together with a home-based program of specific tasks in children with unilateral cerebral palsy results in a greater improvement in structure and function, activity and participation compared to the implementation of a home-based specific task program.

Read the detailed description

Randomized clinical trial with blinding of the evaluator and the person analyzing the data.

A home-based protocol of specific tasks will be performed in both groups and one of the groups will also receive a treatment with upper limb splinting. The assessment will be made by a single evaluator with 10 years of experience in the treatment of children with motor disabilities.

03

Conditions studied

  • Hemiplegia and Hemiparesis
  • Cerebral Palsy Infantile

Keywords

  • Cerebral palsy
  • Hemiplegia
  • Upper-limb splint
  • Home-based
  • Social Participation
04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
5 Years to 12 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  1. Diagnosis of unilateral cerebral palsy (hemiplegia-hemiparesis).
  2. Ages between 5 and 12 years.
  3. Levels I-III of the Manual Ability Classification System (MACS)
  4. Levels I-III of the Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS)
  5. Able to understand and respond to verbal instructions.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Cognitive impairment identified by the school report.
  2. Hand orthopedic surgery in the last 6 months.
  3. Neuropharmacological intervention in the last 6 months.
  4. Allergy to upper limb orthosis material.
  5. Affectation of the manual function not due to the neurological condition (trauma, burn ...).
  6. Current treatments not compatible with the study.
  7. Other significant neurological affections (crisis, severe visual impairment ...).
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Double (Investigator, Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
33 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Intervention group

    Upper-limb splint and home-based protocol in specific tasks

    Device: Home-based protocol in specific tasks · Device: Upper-limb splint

  • Active comparator
    Control group

    Home-based protocol in specific tasks

    Device: Home-based protocol in specific tasks

Interventions

  • DeviceHome-based protocol in specific tasks

    The home-based protocol in specific tasks will be an individualized protocol designed for the child according to the results of the baseline assessment and will require active participation. It is a program that is integrated into the daily routines of the child. A study investigator will tell the family the procedure to follow.

  • DeviceUpper-limb splint

    In the case that treatment with splint is also received, a researcher of this study will take measurements of the hand and will provide the appropriate splint. The intensity of the application will be 5 days a week from monday to friday, for 6 hours a day, for a period of 6 weeks.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Primary Outcome_Change from baseline Assisting Hand Assessment measure. Measurement of bimanual performance in pre-established tasks

    Activity measurement: Assisting Hand Assessment. Measurement of bimanual performance in pre-established tasks. It quantifies the effectiveness with which the child uses his affected hand in bimanual activities.

    Time frame: Pre-intervention; Post-intervention (6 weeks after); Follow up (8 weeks after the intervention).

  2. Primary Outcome_2. Change from baseline Children's Hand-use Experience Questionnaire measure. Measurement of bimanual performance in activities of daily living.

    Participation and activity measurement: Children's Hand-use Experience Questionnaire. The objective of the questionnaire is to measure bimanual performance in activities of daily living.

    Time frame: Pre-intervention; Post-intervention (6 weeks after); Follow up (8 weeks after the intervention).

Secondary outcomes

  1. Secondary Outcome_Change from baseline Box and Blocks Test measure. Measurement of unilateral gross manual dexterity.

    Activity measurement: Box and Blocks Test assesses unilateral gross manual dexterity.

    Time frame: Pre-intervention; Post-intervention (6 weeks after); Follow up (8 weeks after the intervention).

  2. Secondary Outcome_2. Change from baseline Jebsen Hand Function Test measure. Measurement of a broad range of uni-manual hand functions required for activities of daily living.

    Participation measurement: Jebsen Hand Function Test. The objective of this test is to assess a broad range of uni-manual hand functions required for activities of daily living.7 activities performed with the affected hand and healthy hand separately.

    Time frame: Pre-intervention; Post-intervention (6 weeks after); Follow up (8 weeks after the intervention).

  3. Secondary Outcome_3. Change from baseline House Thumb in Palm Deformity Classification. Classify the deformity level of thumb.

    Structure and function measurement: House Thumb in Palm Deformity Classification. This tool classify the deformity levels taking into account the structure of the thumb.

    Time frame: Pre-intervention; Post-intervention (6 weeks after); Follow up (8 weeks after the intervention).

  4. Secondary Outcome_4. Change from baseline Neurological Hand Deformity Classification. This tool classify the deformity levels of wrist and fingers.

    Structure and function measurement: Neurological Hand Deformity Classification. This tools classify the deformity levels taking into account the wrist, fingers.

    Time frame: Pre-intervention; Post-intervention (6 weeks after); Follow up (8 weeks after the intervention).

  5. Secondary Outcome_5. Change from baseline Grip and Pinch Strength measure. Measurement of pinch, wrist and foream strength.

    Structure and function measurement: Grip and Pinch Strength. One will be used to Assess the grip of the thumb (Pinch Gauge Dynamometer) and another to assess the strength of the wrist and forearm (Hand and Wrist Dynamometer).

    Time frame: Pre-intervention; Post-intervention (6 weeks after); Follow up (8 weeks after the intervention).

07

Study locations

2 sites
  • AIDIMO Asociación para la investigación en la discapacidad motriz
    Zaragoza, 50011, Spain
  • Universidad San Jorge
    Zaragoza, 50830, Spain
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Bax M, Goldstein M, Rosenbaum P, Leviton A, Paneth N, Dan B, Jacobsson B, Damiano D; Executive Committee for the Definition of Cerebral Palsy. Proposed definition and classification of cerebral palsy, April 2005. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2005 Aug;47(8):571-6. doi: 10.1017/s001216220500112x. PubMed 16108461 ↗
  • Steenbergen B, Gordon AM. Activity limitation in hemiplegic cerebral palsy: evidence for disorders in motor planning. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2006 Sep;48(9):780-3. doi: 10.1017/S0012162206001666. PubMed 16904028 ↗
  • Arner M, Eliasson AC, Nicklasson S, Sommerstein K, Hagglund G. Hand function in cerebral palsy. Report of 367 children in a population-based longitudinal health care program. J Hand Surg Am. 2008 Oct;33(8):1337-47. doi: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2008.02.032. PubMed 18929198 ↗
  • Malagon Valdez J. [Cerebral palsy]. Medicina (B Aires). 2007;67(6 Pt 1):586-92. Spanish. PubMed 18422084 ↗
  • Kolb B, Whishaw IQ. Neuropsicología humana: Ed. Médica Panamericana; 2006.
  • Cioni G, Sales B, Paolicelli PB, Petacchi E, Scusa MF, Canapicchi R. MRI and clinical characteristics of children with hemiplegic cerebral palsy. Neuropediatrics. 1999 Oct;30(5):249-55. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-973499. PubMed 10598836 ↗
  • Robaina-Castellanos GR, Riesgo-Rodriguez S, Robaina-Castellanos MS. [Definition and classification of cerebral palsy: a problem that has already been solved?]. Rev Neurol. 2007 Jul 16-31;45(2):110-7. Spanish. PubMed 17642051 ↗
  • Himmelmann K, Uvebrant P. The panorama of cerebral palsy in Sweden. XI. Changing patterns in the birth-year period 2003-2006. Acta Paediatr. 2014 Jun;103(6):618-24. doi: 10.1111/apa.12614. Epub 2014 Mar 24. PubMed 24575788 ↗
  • Pueyo-Benito R, Vendrell-Gomez P, Bargallo-Alabart N, Mercader-Sobreques JM. [Neuroimaging and cerebral palsy]. Rev Neurol. 2002 Sep 1-15;35(5):463-9. Spanish. PubMed 12373681 ↗
  • Burtner PA, Poole JL, Torres T, Medora AM, Abeyta R, Keene J, Qualls C. Effect of wrist hand splints on grip, pinch, manual dexterity, and muscle activation in children with spastic hemiplegia: a preliminary study. J Hand Ther. 2008 Jan-Mar;21(1):36-42; quiz 43. doi: 10.1197/j.jht.2007.08.018. PubMed 18215750 ↗
  • Koman LA, Gelberman RH, Toby EB, Poehling GG. Cerebral palsy. Management of the upper extremity. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1990 Apr;(253):62-74. PubMed 2180605 ↗
  • Novak I, Cusick A, Lannin N. Occupational therapy home programs for cerebral palsy: double-blind, randomized, controlled trial. Pediatrics. 2009 Oct;124(4):e606-14. doi: 10.1542/peds.2009-0288. Epub 2009 Sep 21. PubMed 19770175 ↗
  • Elliott C, Reid S, Hamer P, Alderson J, Elliott B. Lycra((R)) arm splints improve movement fluency in children with cerebral palsy. Gait Posture. 2011 Feb;33(2):214-9. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2010.11.008. Epub 2010 Dec 4. PubMed 21131201 ↗
  • Ozer K, Chesher SP, Scheker LR. Neuromuscular electrical stimulation and dynamic bracing for the management of upper-extremity spasticity in children with cerebral palsy. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2006 Jul;48(7):559-63. doi: 10.1017/S0012162206001186. PubMed 16780624 ↗
  • Morris C. A review of the efficacy of lower-limb orthoses used for cerebral palsy. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2002 Mar;44(3):205-11. doi: 10.1017/s0012162201001943. No abstract available. PubMed 12005323 ↗
  • Louwers A, Beelen A, Holmefur M, Krumlinde-Sundholm L. Development of the Assisting Hand Assessment for adolescents (Ad-AHA) and validation of the AHA from 18 months to 18 years. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2016 Dec;58(12):1303-1309. doi: 10.1111/dmcn.13168. Epub 2016 Jun 13. PubMed 27291981 ↗
  • Holmefur M, Aarts P, Hoare B, Krumlinde-Sundholm L. Test-retest and alternate forms reliability of the assisting hand assessment. J Rehabil Med. 2009 Nov;41(11):886-91. doi: 10.2340/16501977-0448. PubMed 19841839 ↗
  • Holmefur M, Krumlinde-Sundholm L, Eliasson AC. Interrater and intrarater reliability of the Assisting Hand Assessment. Am J Occup Ther. 2007 Jan-Feb;61(1):79-84. doi: 10.5014/ajot.61.1.79. PubMed 17302108 ↗
  • Eliasson AC, Krumlinde-Sundholm L, Rosblad B, Beckung E, Arner M, Ohrvall AM, Rosenbaum P. The Manual Ability Classification System (MACS) for children with cerebral palsy: scale development and evidence of validity and reliability. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2006 Jul;48(7):549-54. doi: 10.1017/S0012162206001162. PubMed 16780622 ↗
  • Ohrvall AM, Krumlinde-Sundholm L, Eliasson AC. The stability of the Manual Ability Classification System over time. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2014 Feb;56(2):185-9. doi: 10.1111/dmcn.12348. Epub 2013 Nov 25. PubMed 24417511 ↗
  • Rosenbaum PL, Palisano RJ, Bartlett DJ, Galuppi BE, Russell DJ. Development of the Gross Motor Function Classification System for cerebral palsy. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2008 Apr;50(4):249-53. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8749.2008.02045.x. Epub 2008 Mar 1. PubMed 18318732 ↗
  • Palisano RJ, Cameron D, Rosenbaum PL, Walter SD, Russell D. Stability of the gross motor function classification system. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2006 Jun;48(6):424-8. doi: 10.1017/S0012162206000934. PubMed 16700931 ↗
  • House JH, Gwathmey FW, Fidler MO. A dynamic approach to the thumb-in palm deformity in cerebral palsy. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1981 Feb;63(2):216-25. PubMed 7462278 ↗
  • Georgiades M, Elliott C, Wilton J, Blair E, Blackmore M, Garbellini S. The Neurological Hand Deformity Classification for children with cerebral palsy. Aust Occup Ther J. 2014 Dec;61(6):394-402. doi: 10.1111/1440-1630.12150. Epub 2014 Aug 29. PubMed 25169815 ↗
  • Mathiowetz V, Wiemer DM, Federman SM. Grip and pinch strength: norms for 6- to 19-year-olds. Am J Occup Ther. 1986 Oct;40(10):705-11. doi: 10.5014/ajot.40.10.705. PubMed 3777107 ↗
  • Hepping AM, Ploegmakers JJ, Geertzen JH, Bulstra SK, Stevens M. The Influence of Hand Preference on Grip Strength in Children and Adolescents; A Cross-Sectional Study of 2284 Children and Adolescents. PLoS One. 2015 Nov 23;10(11):e0143476. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0143476. eCollection 2015. PubMed 26599429 ↗
  • Mathiowetz V, Federman S, Wiemer D. Box and block test of manual dexterity: norms for 6-19 year olds 52(5):241-5, 1985.
  • Jongbloed-Pereboom M, Nijhuis-van der Sanden MW, Steenbergen B. Norm scores of the box and block test for children ages 3-10 years. Am J Occup Ther. 2013 May-Jun;67(3):312-8. doi: 10.5014/ajot.2013.006643. PubMed 23597689 ↗
  • Amer A, Eliasson AC, Peny-Dahlstrand M, Hermansson L. Validity and test-retest reliability of Children's Hand-use Experience Questionnaire in children with unilateral cerebral palsy. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2016 Jul;58(7):743-9. doi: 10.1111/dmcn.12991. Epub 2015 Nov 26. PubMed 26610725 ↗
  • Skold A, Hermansson LN, Krumlinde-Sundholm L, Eliasson AC. Development and evidence of validity for the Children's Hand-use Experience Questionnaire (CHEQ). Dev Med Child Neurol. 2011 May;53(5):436-42. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8749.2010.03896.x. Epub 2011 Mar 17. PubMed 21413973 ↗
  • Jebsen RH, Taylor N, Trieschmann RB, Trotter MJ, Howard LA. An objective and standardized test of hand function. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1969 Jun;50(6):311-9. No abstract available. PubMed 5788487 ↗
  • Sears ED, Chung KC. Validity and responsiveness of the Jebsen-Taylor Hand Function Test. J Hand Surg Am. 2010 Jan;35(1):30-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2009.09.008. Epub 2009 Dec 2. PubMed 19954898 ↗
  • Roldan-Perez P, Abuin-Porras V, Buesa-Estellez A, Ortiz-Lucas M. Functional Splinting efficacy in a Specific Task Home Program for Children with Cerebral Palsy. A Randomized Controlled Trial. Dev Neurorehabil. 2022 Oct;25(7):469-478. doi: 10.1080/17518423.2022.2099027. Epub 2022 Jul 13. PubMed 35822931 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reachedSimilar studies: half by the dot; the band is the middle halfHalf of similar studies reached it by the dot; the band is the middle half, from a quarter to three quarters

Ran from Sep 2017 to primary completion in Feb 2019, 17 months.

Of 223 non-industry interventional studies with no phase under Hemiplegia, half reached primary completion within 12 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 5 and three quarters within 27. This study's 17 months is above that.

Counting every sponsor, half of 228 studies reached it within 12 months; a quarter within 5 and three quarters within 27.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Sep 6, 2017
First posted
Sep 14, 2017
StartActual
Sep 11, 2017
Primary completionActual
Feb 28, 2019
CompletionActual
Mar 19, 2019
Last update
Jul 17, 2019
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Jul 17, 2019, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT03282422
Lead sponsor
Universidad San Jorge
Collaborators
AIDIMO Asociación para la investigación en la discapacidad motriz
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Sep 14, 2017
Start date
Sep 11, 2017
Primary completion
Feb 28, 2019
Completion
Mar 19, 2019
Last update
Jul 17, 2019

Study contacts

María Ortiz Lucas, PhD
study director · Universidad San Jorge
Vanesa Abuín Porras, PhD
study director · Universidad Europea de Madrid
Patricia Roldán Pérez, MSc
principal investigator · Universidad San Jorge

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Apr 2019. 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