ClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT03773653Updated Jun 24, 2024

Synergistic Bilateral Upper-Limb Stroke Rehabilitation Based on Robotic Priming Technique

An interventional study of BMT to be combined with BAT and BMT to be combined with MT in Stroke Rehabilitation, sponsored by National Taiwan University Hospital. Completed at 5 sites in Taiwan. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 80 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2024-06-24.

Sponsored by National Taiwan University Hospital · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
81
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years to 80 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

This comparative efficacy study will be based on a 3-armed controlled trial: bilateral robotic priming combined with bilateral arm training (bilateral RT+BAT), bilateral robotic priming combined with mirror therapy (bilateral RT+MT), and the control intervention (bilateral RT+IOT). The goal of this 4-year project is to provide scientific evidence of the comparative efficacy research of hybrid interventions based on unilateral vs. bilateral approach to upper limb rehabilitation in subacute and chronic stroke.

Read the detailed description

This proposed research fits in the NHRI research priority 4-1 by addressing innovative treatment strategies for stroke that is in desperate need of scientific scrutiny. Stroke is one of the major medical conditions that lead to long-term disability and causes heavy health care and financial burden. Advances in clinical and translational neurosciences have led to the new development of stroke rehabilitation. Current stroke rehabilitation programs such as robotic therapy, mirror therapy, and bilateral arm training are bilateral approaches to intensive practice based on the tenet of practice-dependent neuroplasticity. Bilateral robotic therapy can potentially be a movement-based priming technique to promote rebalancing of cortical excitability and create an enriched neuroplastic environment by priming the brain to facilitate motor and functional recovery. This proposed research project will: (1) examine the effects of bilateral robotic priming combined with bilateral arm training approach versus bilateral robotic priming combined with mirror therapy, relative to the control intervention approach (bilateral robotic priming combined with impairment-oriented training) on sensorimotor function, daily function, self-efficacy, quality of life, and motor control strategy in patients with stroke, (2) investigate the 3-month retention effects of robotic priming combined with contemporary rehabilitation approaches (i.e., bilateral arm training and mirror therapy) and the control intervention, and (3) identify the potential predictors of functionally relevant changes after therapy.

02

Conditions studied

  • Stroke Rehabilitation

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • stroke, robot-assisted therapy, mirror therapy
03

In context

Stroke

7,441 studies on the registry are indexed under Stroke; 2,012 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 81 is above the median of 50 across 5,482 interventional studies indexed under Stroke.

Browse Stroke studies →

Lead sponsor

National Taiwan University Hospital is the lead sponsor of 2,608 studies on the registry; 573 are open to participants now.

Of its 11 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 2 (18%) have results posted.

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

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 80 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) ⩾3 months onset from a first-ever unilateral stroke; (2) age range from 18 to 80 years; (3) baseline upper extremity motor score on the Fugl-Meyer Assessment >10 (Fugl-Meyer et al., 1975); (4) no severe spasticity in any joints of the affected arm (Modified Ashworth Scale ⩽ 3) (Charalambous, 2014); (5) able to follow study instructions (Mini Mental State Examination Score ⩾24) (Skidmore et al., 2010); (6) no serious vision deficits and no other neurologic or major orthopedic diseases; (7) able to participate in a rehabilitation intervention program for 6 weeks; and (8) no participation in other studies during the study period and willing to provide written informed consent.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

(1) acute inflammation and (2) major medical problems or poor physical conditions that might interfere with participation.

05

Study design

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

Study arms

  • Experimental
    BMT to be combined with BAT

    Participants in this group will receive bilateral robotic priming and bilateral arm training or mirror therapy within the 90-minute training sessions.

    Behavioral: BMT to be combined with BAT

  • Experimental
    BMT to be combined with MT

    Participants in this group will receive bilateral robotic priming and mirror therapy within the 90-minute training sessions.

    Behavioral: BMT to be combined with MT

  • Active comparator
    BMT to be combined with IOT

    Participants in this group will receive bilateral robotic priming and impairment-oriented training within one 90-minute training session.

    Behavioral: BMT to be combined with IOT

Interventions

  • BehavioralBMT to be combined with BAT

    Specifically, the participants will first receive 40 to 45 minutes of bilateral robotic priming using the BMT. After the robotic priming, participants will receive another 40 to 45 minutes training in tasks focusing on bilateral symmetric movements of both ULs.

  • BehavioralBMT to be combined with MT

    Similar to the RT+BAT group, the participants will first receive 40 to 45 minutes of bilateral robotic priming delivered by the BMT with the same priming protocol. After bilateral robotic priming, participants will receive 40 to 45 minutes of mirror therapy.

  • BehavioralBMT to be combined with IOT

    Similar to the RT+BAT group, the participants will first receive 40 to 45 minutes of bilateral robotic priming delivered by the BMT with the same priming protocol. After bilateral robotic priming, participants will receive 40 to 45 minutes of impairment-oriented training.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Change from Baseline Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA) at 6 weeks, and 18 weeks

    The upper-extremity subscale of the FMA will be used to assess motor impairment. FMA contains 33 items (scale 0-66). The higher summed score means the greater recovery of motor impairment.

    Time frame: Baseline, 6 weeks, and 18 weeks

  2. Change from Baseline ABILHAND Questionnaire at 6 weeks, and 18 weeks

    The ABILHAND Questionnaire will be used to evaluate the ability of the upper limb in functional activities. ABILHAND contains 23 items (scale 0-69). The higher average score means the greater recovery of the ability of the upper limb in functional activities.

    Time frame: Baseline, 6 weeks, and 18 weeks

  3. Change from Baseline Stroke Impact Scale Version 3.0 (SIS 3.0) at 6 weeks, and 18 weeks

    The SIS 3.0 is a stroke-specific health-related quality of life instrument. It consists of 59 items assessing 8 domains (i.e., strength, hand function, activities of daily living/instrumental activities of daily living, mobility, communication, emotion. memory and thinking and participation). Items are rated on a 5-point Likert scale, with lower scores indicating greater difficulty in task completion during the past week.

    Time frame: Baseline, 6 weeks, and 18 weeks

Secondary outcomes

  1. Change from Baseline Goal Attainment Scaling (GAS) at 6 weeks.

    The GAS will be used for measurement the achievement of each participant's expectation in the course of intervention. The individual intervention goals related to daily activity will be negotiated by the therapists and participants. For the goals potentially achievable and not overly ambitious, each goal will be rated on a 5-point ordinal scale with the level of attainment captured. The importance and the difficulty for each goal will be scored also based on a 3-point ordinal scale (1 to 3). The overall GAS score will be calculated by a following formula and a GAS summed score larger than 50 refers to an above-expected performance.

    Time frame: Baseline and 6 weeks

  2. Change from Baseline Functional Independence Measure (FIM) at 6 weeks

    The FIM consists of 18 items (scale 18-126) grouped into 6 subscales measuring self-care, sphincter control, transfer, locomotion, communication, and social cognition ability. The higher summed score means the greater recovery of functional independence.

    Time frame: Baseline and 6 weeks

  3. Change from Baseline Stroke Self Efficacy Questionnaire (SSEQ) at 6 weeks

    The SSEQ will be used to measure participants' confidence in functional performance from stroke. It consists of 13 items (scale 0-130). A higher summed score (maximum score indicates higher self- efficacy in functional performance from stroke.

    Time frame: Baseline and 6 weeks

  4. Change from Baseline Activity level as evaluated by actigraphy at 6 weeks

    We will use the ActiGraph GX3 accelerometers (ActiGraph, Shalimar, FL, USA) to quantitatively measure the amount of use outside the laboratory settings. The accelerometer will record the number of moves each minute, and the average counts of move per minute will be calculated as the primary outcome measure.

    Time frame: Baseline and 6 weeks

  5. Change from Baseline Possible adverse response at 6 weeks

    The vertical numerical rating scale supplemented with a faces rating scale (NRS-FRS) and a self-reported assessment will be provided to evaluate adverse effects on fatigue and pain severity, respectively. Both assessments using 11-point scale (0 = no fatigue/pain to 10 = worst possible fatigue/pain) will be applied.

    Time frame: Baseline and 6 weeks

  6. Change from Baseline Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT) score at 6 weeks

    The WMFT quantifies the motor functions of the upper limbs through timed and functional tasks.

    Time frame: Baseline and 6 weeks

  7. Change from Baseline Revised Nottingham Sensory Assessment (rNSA) at 6 weeks

    The rNSA will be used to evaluate changes in sensation. The rNSA using a 3-point or 4-point scale contains 72 items (scale 0-151) and is divided into tactile sensation, proprioception, and stereognosis subscales. The higher summed score means the greater recovery of sensory impairment.

    Time frame: Baseline and 6 weeks

  8. Change from Baseline Medical Research Council scale (MRC) at 6 weeks

    MRC will be used for measurement of muscle strength of the affected arm. MRC contains 8 items (scale 0-40). The higher summed score means the greater recovery of muscle strength of the affected arm.

    Time frame: Baseline and 6 weeks

  9. Change from lateral pinch strength at 6 weeks

    Lateral pinch strength will be used for measurement of muscle strength of the affected hand. The higher score means the greater recovery of muscle strength on the pinch strength.

    Time frame: Baseline and 6 weeks

  10. Change from Baseline Chedoke Arm and Hand Activity Inventory (CAHAI) score at 6 weeks

    The CAHAI quantifies the bilateral motor functions of the upper limbs through and functional tasks.

    Time frame: Baseline and 6 weeks

07

Study locations

5 sites
  • Taipei Tzu Chi Hospital, Buddhist Tzu Chi Foundation
    New Taipei City, Taiwan
  • Feng Yuan Hospital, Ministry of Health and Welfare
    Taichung, Taiwan
  • National Taiwan University Hospital
    Taipei, Taiwan
  • Taipei Hospital, Ministry of Health and Welfare
    Taipei, Taiwan
  • Linkou Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung Medical Foundation
    Taoyuan, Taiwan
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Wu SY, Li YC, Chen YW, Chen CL, Pan HC, Lin KC, Lau HY. Construct validity, responsiveness, minimal detectable change, and minimal clinically important difference of the stroke self-efficacy questionnaire in individuals receiving stroke rehabilitation. Disabil Rehabil. 2024 Dec;46(25):6195-6203. doi: 10.1080/09638288.2024.2324122. Epub 2024 Mar 3. PubMed 38433459 ↗
  • Lee YC, Li YC, Lin KC, Yao G, Chang YJ, Lee YY, Liu CT, Hsu WL, Wu YH, Chu HT, Liu TX, Yeh YP, Chang C. Effects of robotic priming of bilateral arm training, mirror therapy, and impairment-oriented training on sensorimotor and daily functions in patients with chronic stroke: study protocol of a single-blind, randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2022 Jul 15;23(1):566. doi: 10.1186/s13063-022-06498-0. PubMed 35841056 ↗
  • Li YC, Lin KC, Chen CL, Yao G, Chang YJ, Lee YY, Liu CT. A Comparative Efficacy Study of Robotic Priming of Bilateral Approach in Stroke Rehabilitation. Front Neurol. 2021 Jul 12;12:658567. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2021.658567. eCollection 2021. PubMed 34322077 ↗
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 Nov 2018 to primary completion in Apr 2023, 53 months.

Of 2,859 non-industry interventional studies with no phase under Stroke, half reached primary completion within 23 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 10 and three quarters within 45. This study's 53 months is above that.

Counting every sponsor, half of 2,988 studies reached it within 23 months; a quarter within 10 and three quarters within 45.

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

Registered
Nov 13, 2018
First posted
Dec 12, 2018
StartActual
Nov 12, 2018
Primary completionActual
Apr 25, 2023
CompletionActual
Apr 25, 2023
Last update
Jun 24, 2024
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 Jun 24, 2024, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT03773653
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Dec 12, 2018
Start date
Nov 12, 2018
Primary completion
Apr 25, 2023
Completion
Apr 25, 2023
Last update
Jun 24, 2024

Study contacts

Keh-chung Lin, ScD
principal investigator · School of Occupational Therapy, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan

Oversight

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 May 2022. 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