ClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT06818188Updated Feb 10, 2025

Effect of Rhythmic Auditory Stimulation(RAS) on Turning in Post-stroke Patients

An interventional study of Turning based specific training with rhythmic auditory stimulation (RAS) and Turning based specific training without rhythmic auditory stimulation (RAS) in Stroke, sponsored by Foundation University Islamabad. Completed at 1 site in Pakistan. Open to participants aged 45 Years to 60 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2025-02-10.

Sponsored by Foundation University Islamabad · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

From the registry’s dates

  • Registered 9 months after the study started (first participant enrolled Apr 2024, registered Jan 2025).
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
32
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
45 Years to 60 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

As, stroke is the second leading cause of death and disability globally, leads to postural changes, disturbance in balance, increase fall risks, \& gait dysfunctions, affecting daily activities and walking ability.As, turning is the major component of ambulation. But this difficulty in post stroke results in increased fall risk.Stroke survivors encounter multiple gait abnormalities, which increases difficulty in changing direction.Multiple studies have reported that, RAS with beats of metronome is an effective intervention on balance \& gait patterns i-e stride length, gait speed, \& symmetry in post-stroke patients .With little evidence available targeting comparative effectiveness with \& without RAS on turning in post-stroke patients. This study will fill this gap, to determine the effect on changing direction, with \& without RAS and will be helpful in providing evidence to literature, will provide treatment protocol for turning in gait.

Read the detailed description

CHAPTER III OBJECTIVES OF STUDY

  1. To determine the effect on turning in post-stroke patients with and without rhythmic auditory stimulation (RAS)
  2. To determine the effect on balance in post-stroke patients with and without rhythmic auditory stimulation (RAS)
  3. To determine the effect on cadence in post-stroke patients with and without rhythmic auditory stimulation (RAS)
  4. To determine the effect on gait speed in post-stroke patients with and without rhythmic auditory stimulation (RAS)

HYPOTHESIS OF STUDY

ALTERNATE HYPOTHESIS:

  1. HA: There is a statistically significant difference on turning in post-stroke patients with and without RAS i-e P\<0.5
  2. HA: There is a statistically significant difference on balance in post-stroke patients with and without RAS i-e P\<0.5
  3. HA: There is a statistically significant difference on cadence in post-stroke patients with and without RAS i-e P\<0.5 4:HA: There is a statistically significant difference on gait speed in post-stroke patients with and without RAS i-e P\<0.5

NULL HYPOTHESIS:

  1. HO: There is no statistically significant difference on turning in post-stroke patients with and without RAS i-e P>0.5
  2. HO: There is no statistically significant difference on balance in post-stroke patients with and without RAS i-e P>0.5
  3. HO: There is no statistically significant difference on cadence in post-stroke patients with and without RAS i-e P>0.5
  4. HO: There is no statistically significant difference on gait speed in post-stroke patients with and without RAS i-e P>0.5

Sample Selection Criteria:

Recruitment was based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, as below:

Inclusion Criteria:

Age 45-60 years Male and Females both Sub-acute and chronic ischemic stroke patient (MCA >6months) Mini Mental State Examination score of 25 or higher Functional Ambulation Category (2-3) Berg Balance scale, score of 40-50

Exclusion Criteria:

Hemorrhagic stroke Case or history of epilepsy Patients, having other neurological conditions, Alzheimer, Parkinson \& Dementias

RANDOMIZATION \& ALLOCATION:

Recruited participants were allocated to the experimental and the control group through simple random sampling technique using coin toss method.

Experimental group has received Turning based specific training with Rhythmic Auditory Stimulation (TBST-RAS).

Control group has received Turning based specific training without Rhythmic Auditory Stimulation (TBST).

BLINDING:

This study was non-blinded.

DATA COLLECTION PROCEDURE:

Before commencing data collection, we obtained ethical approval from ERC Foundation University Islamabad, following which approval from the higher authorities of Fauji Foundation Hospital Rawalpindi was taken. Participants were approached during their free time and referred by medical OPD who were willing to volunteer for the study. Informed consent in written form was taken after explaining the research purpose along with the associated participation benefits and risks to the individuals. Participants were included in the study after considering inclusion and exclusion criteria. Baseline data was obtained, by performing 180 degree test, Figure of eight, Berg balance scale, Time up and Go (TUG), and 10 meter walk (10MWT) for Turning, Balance, Cadence, and Gait Speed respectively, then participants underwent an intervention phase of 6 weeks (3 days per week on alternate days). After completion of sessions, post-assessment was done for evaluation of turning, balance and gait.

02

Conditions studied

  • Stroke

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • post stroke
  • rhythmic auditory stimulation
  • turning based specific training
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 32 is below the median of 50 across 5,482 interventional studies indexed under Stroke.

Browse Stroke studies →

Lead sponsor

Foundation University Islamabad is the lead sponsor of 253 studies on the registry; 140 are open to participants now.

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

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
45 Years to 60 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

  • Age 45-60 years
  • Male \& Females both
  • Sub-acute \& chronic ischemic stroke patient (MCA >6months)
  • Mini Mental State Examination score of 25 or higher
  • Functional Ambulation Category score 2-3
  • Berg Balance scale score of 40-50

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Hemorrhagic stroke
  • Case or history of epilepsy
  • Patients, having other neurological conditions, Alzheimer, Parkinson \& Dementias
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
32 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Active comparator
    Turning based training without RAS

    The participants will receive turning based training without RAS, 3 days per week on alternate days for turning, balance and gait improvement.

    Other: Turning based specific training without rhythmic auditory stimulation (RAS)

  • Experimental
    Turning based training with RAS

    The participants will receive turning based training with RAS, 3 days per week on alternate days for turning, balance and gait improvement.

    Other: Turning based specific training with rhythmic auditory stimulation (RAS)

Interventions

  • OtherTurning based specific training with rhythmic auditory stimulation (RAS)

    The study involved an experimental group that underwent a 6-week turning-based training with rhythmic auditory stimulation (TBST-RAS), performed three times a week on alternate days. The purpose was to improve motor control and walking abilities through rhythmic auditory cues, specifically adjusting the metronome's beat to the patient's cadence. Week 1: Patients performed turning exercises around a cone and walking with visual cues at 5% rhythmic auditory cue intensity, with rest periods. Weeks 2-3: The intensity of rhythmic auditory cues increased to 10%, and patients engaged in cone turning, figure-of-eight walking, and walking with visual cues, with rest breaks in between. Weeks 4-5: Rhythmic auditory cue intensity increased to 15%. Exercises included cone turning, figure-of-eight walking, walking with visual cues, multidirectional stepping, and rest periods. Week 6: The final week involved exercises with a further increase in rhythmic auditory cue intensity to 20%. The exercise

  • OtherTurning based specific training without rhythmic auditory stimulation (RAS)

    The control group underwent 6 weeks of turning-based specific training without rhythmic auditory stimulation (TBST), performed three times a week on alternate days. The training followed this pattern: Week 1: Patients began with cone turning for 5 minutes, followed by 2 minutes of rest. Then, they walked with visual cues for 5 minutes, also without rhythmic auditory stimulation. Weeks 2-3: The exercises continued with cone turning and figure-of-eight walking for 5 minutes each, with 2-minute rest periods in between. Patients also walked with visual cues for 5 minutes without RAS. Weeks 4-5: The exercises included cone turning, figure-of-eight walking, walking with visual cues, and multidirectional stepping (forward, backward, laterally), all for 5 minutes each, with rest periods between exercises. Week 6: In the final week, the duration of cone turning and figure-of-eight walking was reduced to 3 minutes, but the exercises still had 2-minute rest periods in between. Patients also p

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Turning assessment

    180 degree turn test will be used. piece of colored tape placed on floor to mark starting point, participant will be asked to turn 180° on spot from standing start position \& within a designated marked area on floor. The starting point is marked with a piece of colorful tape on the floor, and the participant is then told to stand with their feet pointed in that direction. After that, they are then instructed to immediately turn 180 degrees from the starting position while standing in a certain, indicated area on the floor. The number of steps required to turn 180 degrees will be counted after the subject is instructed to turn "as fast as he/she can." There will be three rotations in each direction, with a one-minute of break in between. The chance of falling increases with more than five steps. About three seconds is the meantime

    Time frame: 6 weeks

  2. Turning assessment

    Through figure of 8. participant will walk in figure of 8 shape around 2 cones (Clockwise \& anti-clockwise)

    Time frame: 6 weeks

  3. Balance

    The Berg Balance Scale is 14 item scale, assesses the balance of patients with neurological disorders. Performance is assessed on different tasks and each task is graded with a 5- point ordinal scale ranging from 0 to 4, Maximum score à 56 points à adequate postural balance \& no risk of falls. Score equal to or less than 45 points indicates risk of fall. Between 56 \& 41 points, indicate a low risk of falling, between 40 \& 21 points a medium risk of falling, \& between 20 and 0 points a high risk of falling.

    Time frame: 6 weeks

  4. Balance

    Timed up and go test. It measures the time taken for an individual to rise from a chair, walk 3 meters, turn, walk back and sit down

    Time frame: 6 weeks

  5. Cadence

    10 meter walk test

    Time frame: 6 weeks

  6. Gait speed

    10 meter walk test. Mark off 10 m on floor with tape, time in sec how long it takes for patient to walk in 10 meter, having them start few feet before the line and keep going a few feet after the line. calculate in Meters/minute

    Time frame: 6 weeks

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Foundation University College of Physical Therapy
    Islamabad, 44000, Pakistan
08

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 Apr 2024 to primary completion in Dec 2024, 8 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 8 months is below 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
Jan 27, 2025
First posted
Feb 10, 2025
StartActual
Apr 18, 2024
Primary completionActual
Dec 20, 2024
CompletionActual
Dec 30, 2024
Last update
Feb 10, 2025
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 Feb 10, 2025, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
09

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT06818188
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Feb 10, 2025
Start date
Apr 18, 2024
Primary completion
Dec 20, 2024
Completion
Dec 30, 2024
Last update
Feb 10, 2025

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 Jan 2025. 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