CClinicalTrials.gg
Status unknownNCT05288270RobocopUpdated Mar 21, 2022

ROBOtic Care of Post-stroke Pain.

An interventional study of Aramis and Conventional therapy in Stroke, sponsored by S.Anna Rehabilitation Institute. Status unknown. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 80 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2022-03-21.

Sponsored by S.Anna Rehabilitation Institute · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

The sponsor has not verified this record recently (last verified Mar 2022), so the status shown — last known as Not yet recruiting — may be out of date.
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
118
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years to 80 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

In agreement to the Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) recommendations that support the importance of physical functioning as core outcome for pain this randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trial will be the pilot forming the rational basis for the assessment of the efficacy in the use of Robotic rehabilitation system to prevent chronic post stroke pain development. In fact, according to working hypothesis, proprioceptive inputs with high-intensive bilateral movement training of the hemiplegic arm can improve recovery and plasticity, thus preventing chronic post-stroke pain from occurring within the 3-6 months following stroke.

Read the detailed description

Stroke is one of the most frequent causes of death and disability worldwide. It is accompanied by impaired motor function of the upper extremities in over 69% of patients up to hemiplegia in the following 5 years in 56% of cases. This condition often is characterized by chronic post-stroke pain, difficult to manage and further worsening the patients' quality of life. Post-stroke pain occurs within 3-6 months and aberrant neuroplasticity in the first 3-4 weeks is implicated in its development. Robot-assisted neurorehabilitation using the Automatic Recovery Arm Motility Integrated System (ARAMIS) has proven efficacy in motor function recovery exploiting the movements and the strength of the unaffected arm to drive correct brain re-arrangement. Therefore, the rationale of the ROBOCOP (ROBOtic Care of Post-stroke pain) randomized, double-blind trial for the assessment of the impact of robot-assisted functional and motor recovery on post-stroke pain development is based on the prevention of anomalous plasticity and, hopefully, on the recovery of connectivity in the injured area.

To this aim, a total of 118 patients with hemiplegic arm due to stroke will be enrolled and randomly allocated with 1:1 ratio to ARAMIS or conventional neurorehabilitation group. After a baseline screening at hospital discharge during subacute period, ARAMIS or conventional rehabilitation will be performed for 8 weeks. The primary endpoint will consist in improvement of the Upper Extremity Subscale of the Fugl-Meyer Motor Assessment (FMA-UE), for the body functions of the upper extremity section domain; the Action Research Arm Test (ARAT) scores at 1, 2, 3 and 6 months after stroke. The secondary endpoints include no worsening of pain Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and improvement of Barthel Index (BI) for activities of daily living and of Frenchay activities index (FAI) for physical activity, as well as improvement of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and electroencephalographic (EEG) parameters This is the first clinical trial investigating the efficacy of robot-assisted neurorehabilitation using ARAMIS on brain plasticity and re-organization and on post-stroke pain prevention. This study could remarkably improve the quality of life of stroke survivors.

02

Conditions studied

  • Stroke

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • Robotic rehabilitation
  • Pain
  • stroke recovery
03

In context

Stroke

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

This study's planned enrollment of 118 is above the median of 50 across 5,369 interventional studies indexed under Stroke.

Browse Stroke studies →

Lead sponsor

S.Anna Rehabilitation Institute is the lead sponsor of 4 studies on the registry; none are open to participants now.

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

Inclusion criteria

  • Stroke-related hemiplegic arm;
  • Hemiplegic subacute patients of any age at hospital discharge after stroke with functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) scan of the area affected.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

Bilateral impairment;

  • Presence of aphasia;
  • Presence of cognitive impairment;
  • Stroke diagnosis without occurrence of hemiparesis of the upper limb.
05

Study design

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

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Aramis Group

    Consecutive patients, admitted to Sant' Anna Institute with diagnosis of stroke after hospital discharge that need motor and cognitive treatment and rehabilitation of neurological diseases.

    Device: Aramis

  • Active comparator
    Conventional Group therapy

    Consecutive patients, admitted to Sant' Anna Institute with diagnosis of stroke after hospital discharge that need motor and cognitive treatment and rehabilitation of neurological diseases.

    Other: Conventional therapy

Interventions

  • DeviceAramis

    ARAMIS is composed of two computer-controlled, symmetric and interacting exoskeletons able to compensate the inadequate strength and accuracy of the paretic arm movements, of which it measures residual motor function, and the effect of gravity during rehabilitation. It acts through motion capture of the movements of the unaffected arm. In so doing, the patient is able to replicate the movements of the healthy arm with the paretic arm in synchronous, asynchronous or active-assisted manner. The robot-assisted neurorehabilitation using ARAMIS consists in 60-min sessions for 8 weeks,structured as follows: * 1 to 4 weeks: asynchronous exercises of repletion by the paretic arm of basic exercises 20 times for a total of 200 repetitions per session; * 5 to 8 weeks: replaced by synchronous exercises (100/session) with active-assisted modality.

  • OtherConventional therapy

    The control group will receive conventional rehabilitation consisting in passive mobilization of upper and lower limbs, coordination respiratory exercises, cardiovascular conditioning in the setting posture, conditioning in the upright posture, exercises for the trunk control.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Fugl-Meyer Motor Assessment - upper extremity (FMA-UE)

    Improvement of Fugl-Meyer Motor Assessment (FMA-UE) scores. The score may range from 0 to 115. A higher score indicates better recovery

    Time frame: up to 6 months after the admission assessment.

  2. Action Research Arm Test (ARAT)- Motor recovery scale

    Improvement of Action Research Arm Test (ARAT) scores. Scores on the ARAT may range from 0-57 points, with a maximum score of 57 points indicating better performance

    Time frame: up to 6 months after the admission assessment.

  3. Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) - Pain reduction

    No worsening of Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Using a ruler, the score is determined by mea-suring the distance (mm) on the 10-cm line between the "no pain" anchor and the patient's mark, providing a range of scores from 0-100. A higher score indicates greater pain intensity. Based on the distribution of pain VAS scores in patients who described their pain intensity as none, mild, moderate, or severe, the following cut points on the pain VAS have been recommended: no pain (0-4 mm), mild pain(5-44 mm), moderate pain (45-74 mm), and severe pain (75-100 mm).

    Time frame: up to 6 months after the admission assessment.

  4. Barthel Index (BI)

    Improvement of Barthel Index (BI). Scores on the BI may range from 0-100 points, with a maximum score of 100 points. Score from 80 to 100 indicates that the patient should be able to live indipendently

    Time frame: up to 6 months after the admission assessment.

07

Study locations

No study locations are listed for this record.

08

References and documents

Publications

  • Cerasa A, Pignolo L, Gramigna V, Serra S, Olivadese G, Rocca F, Perrotta P, Dolce G, Quattrone A, Tonin P. Exoskeleton-Robot Assisted Therapy in Stroke Patients: A Lesion Mapping Study. Front Neuroinform. 2018 Jul 17;12:44. doi: 10.3389/fninf.2018.00044. eCollection 2018. PubMed 30065642 ↗
  • Pignolo L, Serra S, Basta G, Carozzo S, Arcuri F, Pignataro LM, Ciancarelli I, Tonin P, Cerasa A. Data on a new neurorehabilitation approach targeting functional recovery in stroke patients. Data Brief. 2019 Oct 28;27:104685. doi: 10.1016/j.dib.2019.104685. eCollection 2019 Dec. PubMed 31737755 ↗
  • Pignolo L. Robotics in neuro-rehabilitation. J Rehabil Med. 2009 Nov;41(12):955-60. doi: 10.2340/16501977-0434. PubMed 19841823 ↗
  • Calabro RS, Filoni S, Billeri L, Balletta T, Cannavo A, Militi A, Milardi D, Pignolo L, Naro A. Robotic Rehabilitation in Spinal Cord Injury: A Pilot Study on End-Effectors and Neurophysiological Outcomes. Ann Biomed Eng. 2021 Feb;49(2):732-745. doi: 10.1007/s10439-020-02611-z. Epub 2020 Sep 11. PubMed 32918105 ↗
  • Calabro RS, Pignolo L, Muller-Eising C, Naro A. Pain Perception in Disorder of Consciousness: A Scoping Review on Current Knowledge, Clinical Applications, and Future Perspective. Brain Sci. 2021 May 20;11(5):665. doi: 10.3390/brainsci11050665. PubMed 34065349 ↗
  • Colizzi L, Lidonnici A, Pignolo L. The ARAMIS project: a concept robot and technical design. J Rehabil Med. 2009 Nov;41(12):1011-101. doi: 10.2340/16501977-0407. PubMed 19841834 ↗
  • Gandolfi M, Vale N, Posteraro F, Morone G, Dell'orco A, Botticelli A, Dimitrova E, Gervasoni E, Goffredo M, Zenzeri J, Antonini A, Daniele C, Benanti P, Boldrini P, Bonaiuti D, Castelli E, Draicchio F, Falabella V, Galeri S, Gimigliano F, Grigioni M, Mazzon S, Molteni F, Petrarca M, Picelli A, Senatore M, Turchetti G, Giansanti D, Mazzoleni S; Italian Consensus Conference on Robotics in Neurorehabilitation (CICERONE). State of the art and challenges for the classification of studies on electromechanical and robotic devices in neurorehabilitation: a scoping review. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2021 Oct;57(5):831-840. doi: 10.23736/S1973-9087.21.06922-7. Epub 2021 May 27. PubMed 34042413 ↗
  • Paolucci S, Iosa M, Toni D, Barbanti P, Bovi P, Cavallini A, Candeloro E, Mancini A, Mancuso M, Monaco S, Pieroni A, Recchia S, Sessa M, Strambo D, Tinazzi M, Cruccu G, Truini A; Neuropathic pain special interest group of the Italian Neurological Society. Prevalence and Time Course of Post-Stroke Pain: A Multicenter Prospective Hospital-Based Study. Pain Med. 2016 May;17(5):924-30. doi: 10.1093/pm/pnv019. Epub 2015 Dec 14. PubMed 26814255 ↗
  • Scuteri D, Mantovani E, Tamburin S, Sandrini G, Corasaniti MT, Bagetta G, Tonin P. Opioids in Post-stroke Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Front Pharmacol. 2020 Nov 27;11:587050. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2020.587050. eCollection 2020. PubMed 33424596 ↗
  • Scuteri D, Corasaniti MT, Tonin P, Bagetta G. Eptinezumab for the treatment of migraine. Drugs Today (Barc). 2019 Nov;55(11):695-703. doi: 10.1358/dot.2019.55.11.3069864. PubMed 31840684 ↗
  • Scuteri D, Rombola L, Morrone LA, Bagetta G, Sakurada S, Sakurada T, Tonin P, Corasaniti MT. Neuropharmacology of the Neuropsychiatric Symptoms of Dementia and Role of Pain: Essential Oil of Bergamot as a Novel Therapeutic Approach. Int J Mol Sci. 2019 Jul 6;20(13):3327. doi: 10.3390/ijms20133327. PubMed 31284573 ↗
  • Dolce G, Lucca LF, Pignolo L. Robot-assisted rehabilitation of the paretic upper limb: rationale of the ARAMIS project. J Rehabil Med. 2009 Nov;41(12):1007-101. doi: 10.2340/16501977-0406. PubMed 19841833 ↗
  • Pignolo L, Lucca LF, Basta G, Serra S, Pugliese ME, Sannita WG, Dolce G. A new treatment in the rehabilitation of the paretic upper limb after stroke: the ARAMIS prototype and treatment protocol. Ann Ist Super Sanita. 2016 Apr-Jun;52(2):301-8. doi: 10.4415/ANN_16_02_25. PubMed 27364408 ↗
  • Cramer SC. Functional imaging in stroke recovery. Stroke. 2004 Nov;35(11 Suppl 1):2695-8. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.0000143326.36847.b0. Epub 2004 Sep 23. PubMed 15388899 ↗
  • Lee J, Park E, Lee A, Chang WH, Kim DS, Kim YH. Recovery-related indicators of motor network plasticity according to impairment severity after stroke. Eur J Neurol. 2017 Oct;24(10):1290-1299. doi: 10.1111/ene.13377. Epub 2017 Aug 18. PubMed 28833921 ↗
  • Ustinova KI, Goussev VM, Balasubramaniam R, Leven MF. Disruption of coordination between arm, trunk, and center of pressure displacement in patients with hemiparesis. Motor Control. 2004 Apr;8(2):139-59. doi: 10.1123/mcj.8.2.139. PubMed 15118199 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: Yes — De-identified individual partecipant data for all primary and secondary outcome measures will be made available.

Supporting information: Study protocol, Sap, Icf, Csr

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Mar 21, 2022, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT05288270
Lead sponsor
S.Anna Rehabilitation Institute
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Mar 21, 2022
Start date
Apr 1, 2022 (estimated)
Primary completion
Jul 30, 2022 (estimated)
Completion
Jul 30, 2023 (estimated)
Last update
Mar 21, 2022

Study contacts

Loris Pignolo
Contact
l.pignolo@isakr.it
+39096223973
Loris Pignolo
Contact
l.pignolo@isakr.it
+39096227579

Oversight

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

Not currently enrolling

This study is status unknown, as verified in Mar 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