StrokeNCT02331407
Effect of Robot Rehabilitation Exercise Training on Motor Control After Stroke
A study testing Robotic arm therapy in people with Stroke, run by Columbia University at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
Stroke is a leading cause of neurological disability worldwide, often causing significant weakening and paresis of the affected arm. National spending on post-stroke rehabilitation is project to expand 20% to 35% through 2010. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 21 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Stroke
- What is being tested?
- Robotic arm therapy
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 9 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- Oct 2008to May 2011
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 21 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Hemiparesis of the upper extremity
- Diagnosis of a first clinically apparent ischemic stroke at least 6 months prior to study entry
- Age 18 years or older
- Ability to sit and be active for an hour on a chair (or wheelchair) without cardiac, respiratory disturbances and/or pain.
Who cannot join
- Inability to understand and/or follow instructions
- Pain in shoulder or arm
- Other neurological or musculoskeletal target organ disorder
- Inability to give informed consent personally
- Previous or current contracture of the upper extremity
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
Columbia Univeristy, Neurological Institute
New York, New York, 10032
About this study
Stroke is a leading cause of neurological disability worldwide, often causing significant weakening and paresis of the affected arm. National spending on post-stroke rehabilitation is project to expand 20% to 35% through 2010. As a new tool for therapists, robotic stroke therapy devices have the potential to be a cost-effective device aid to physical therapy and enable novel modes of exercise not currently available. While recent studies have shown chronic patients benefit from repetitive practice, it is not clear whether they improved via a reduction in impairment or increased functional compensation because there is a lack of standard treatment and scales to assess rehabilitation efficacy in chronic stroke patients. This study aims to reconcile difference performance measurements in robotic rehabilitation to assess the outcome of robotic rehabilitation training.
- Conditions
- Stroke
- Being tested
- Robotic arm therapy
- Medical subject headings
- Stroke
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Robotic arm therapyDevice
Training with the ReoGo device
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Robot arm rehabilitation therapy | Experimental | Arm training using the ReoGo robotic device, 3 times a week for 3 weeks. Receives: Device: Robotic arm therapy |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Change in Arm Motor Control From Baseline Measured as Average Squared Mahalanobis Distance
Arm motor control was assessed through analysis of reaching movements to targets. We derive a measure of arm motor control using functional principal components analysis of reaching trajectories (average squared Mahalanobis distance). This is a unitless measure and lower change values reflect improvement in motor control, while a higher change value reflect a worsening in motor control.
Measured: From baseline to within 1 week post-therapy
Secondary outcomes (2)
Fugl-Meyer (FM) Upper Extremity Motor Assessment
The FM is a measure of impairment that considers movement arm, wrist, hand, and coordination. Each of the 22 items is scored on a three-point ordinal scale for total score between a minimum score of 0 and a maximum score of 66. A higher score indicates a better outcome.
Measured: baseline (1 and 3 weeks prior to therapy), within 1 week after therapy, 3 weeks after therapy
Action Research Arm Test
The ARAT tests hand and arm function and consists of 19 items in 4 domains: grasp, grip, pinch, and gross movement. Each domain contains items arranged into hierarchical order of difficulty such that success at the most difficult item of a specific subclass assumes success for all items lower in the hierarchy of the same class. Each item is scored on a four-point ordinal scale for total score between a minimum score of 0 and a maximum score of 57. A higher score indicates a better outcome.
Measured: baseline (1 and 3 weeks prior to therapy), within 1 week after therapy, 3 weeks after therapy
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted6 Jan 2015 (estimated)
- Study startOct 2008
- Primary completionMay 2011
- Study completionMay 2011
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Other trials for StrokeStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Columbia UniversityThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 9 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Columbia University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Orentreich Family Foundation, Mailman School of Public Health
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- John Krakauer, MD, Principal investigator, Columbia University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02331407
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- AAAD3437
- Status last verified
- Apr 2019
- First submitted
- 1 Jan 2015
- Last updated
- 7 May 2019
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 7 May 2019. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Effect of Robot Rehabilitation Exercise Training on Motor Control After Stroke
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02331407
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- AAAD3437
- Conditions
- Stroke
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 9 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Columbia UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Orentreich Family Foundation, Mailman School of Public Health
- Study start
- Oct 2008
- Primary completion
- May 2011 (actual)
- Study completion
- May 2011 (actual)
- First posted
- 6 Jan 2015 (estimated)
- Results
- Posted 7 May 2019
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Stroke is a leading cause of neurological disability worldwide, often causing significant weakening and paresis of the affected arm. National spending on post-stroke rehabilitation is project to expand 20% to 35% through 2010. As a new tool for therapists, robotic stroke therapy devices have the potential to be a cost-effective device aid to physical therapy and enable novel modes of exercise not currently available. While recent studies have shown chronic patients benefit from repetitive practice, it is not clear whether they improved via a reduction in impairment or increased functional compensation because there is a lack of standard treatment and scales to assess rehabilitation efficacy in chronic stroke patients. This study aims to reconcile difference performance measurements in robotic rehabilitation to assess the outcome of robotic rehabilitation training.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 1
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Robot arm rehabilitation therapy | Experimental | Device: Robotic arm therapyArm training using the ReoGo robotic device, 3 times a week for 3 weeks. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 21 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Hemiparesis of the upper extremity
- Diagnosis of a first clinically apparent ischemic stroke at least 6 months prior to study entry
- Age 18 years or older
- Ability to sit and be active for an hour on a chair (or wheelchair) without cardiac, respiratory disturbances and/or pain.
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Inability to understand and/or follow instructions
- Pain in shoulder or arm
- Other neurological or musculoskeletal target organ disorder
- Inability to give informed consent personally
- Previous or current contracture of the upper extremity
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Robotic arm therapyTraining with the ReoGo device | Device | Robot arm rehabilitation therapy |
Primary outcome
Change in Arm Motor Control From Baseline Measured as Average Squared Mahalanobis Distance
Time frame: From baseline to within 1 week post-therapy
Arm motor control was assessed through analysis of reaching movements to targets. We derive a measure of arm motor control using functional principal components analysis of reaching trajectories (average squared Mahalanobis distance). This is a unitless measure and lower change values reflect improvement in motor control, while a higher change value reflect a worsening in motor control.
2 secondary outcomes
Fugl-Meyer (FM) Upper Extremity Motor Assessment
Time frame: baseline (1 and 3 weeks prior to therapy), within 1 week after therapy, 3 weeks after therapy
Action Research Arm Test
Time frame: baseline (1 and 3 weeks prior to therapy), within 1 week after therapy, 3 weeks after therapy
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 7 May 2019.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
Related trials for Stroke
Not yet recruiting
Temporal Interference Stimulation for Upper-Limb Motor Recovery in Early Subacute Stroke
Acute Ischemic Stroke
RecruitingObservational study
ELATE Study: Evaluating Large-vessel Acute Thrombectomy in Extended Time Window
Acute Ichemic Stroke
Recruiting
Web-Based Tele-Rehabilitation Using Action Observation and Mirror Therapy for Subacute Stroke: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Stroke, Upper Extremity Paresis
Recruiting
Early Motor-Cognitive Integrative Training on Cognitive and Motor Performance in Patients With Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage
Subarachnoid Aneurysm Hemorrhage
Not yet recruiting
Selective Intra-Arterial Hypothermia After Endovascular Treatment for Acute Basilar Artery Occlusion
Acute Ischemic Stroke, Basilar Artery Occlusion
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
John Krakauer, MD principal investigator
Columbia University
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Robotic arm therapy in people with Stroke, run by Columbia University at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 4 inclusion and 5 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 7 May 2019. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 7 May 2019). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Change in Arm Motor Control From Baseline Measured as Average Squared Mahalanobis Distance (time frame: From baseline to within 1 week post-therapy). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 7 May 2019.