Cerebrovascular StrokeNCT02759627
Does Isolated Robotic-Assisted Gait Training Improve Functional Status, Daily Living And Quality Of Life In Stroke?
A study testing Robotic-Assisted Gait Training in people with Cerebrovascular Stroke and Cerebrovascular Accident, run by Istanbul University.
Trial summary
Stroke is one of the major cause of morbidity and mortality and the leading cause of disability in adults all around the world. Stroke survivors can suffer several neurological impairments and deficits which have an important impact on patient's quality of life and which increase the costs for health and social… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 75 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Cerebrovascular Stroke, Cerebrovascular Accident, Cerebral Stroke
- What is being tested?
- Robotic-Assisted Gait Training
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 51 participants
- Where
- No sites listed yet
- Study dates
- Nov 2014to Mar 2016
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
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 18 to 75 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- diagnosis of a stroke (at least 3 months),
- ambulatory with or without the use of an assistive device or ankle-foot orthosis,
- 3 or higher grades in Functional Ambulation Category,
- able to walk 10 meters with or without supervision,
- able to follow verbal instructions,
- physician approval to enter an exercise program.
Who cannot join
- previous stroke history,
- any other neurologic disorders, complications from other health conditions (cardiovascular or musculoskeletal conditions),
- contracture or muscle tonus ≥ 3 according to Modified Ashworth Scale, preventing range of motion in lower extremity,
- severe osteoporosis,
- cognitive deficit preventing them from following instructions.
About this study
Official title: Does Isolated Robotic-Assisted Gait Training Improve Functional Status, Daily Living And Quality Of Life In Stroke Patients?: A Single-Blinded Randomized Controlled Study
Stroke is one of the major cause of morbidity and mortality and the leading cause of disability in adults all around the world. Stroke survivors can suffer several neurological impairments and deficits which have an important impact on patient's quality of life and which increase the costs for health and social services. After stroke, impairments in ADLs and functional status, deterioration in health related quality of life can be seen.
Although most of the stroke survivors experience some level of neurological recovery, nearly 50%-60% of stroke patients still experience some degree of motor impairment, and approximately 50% are at least partly dependent in activities-of-daily-living (ADL). Gait recovery, performing activities of daily living and regaining independence in ADLs are the main focus of stroke rehabilitation programs.
Read more
Robotic technologies are becoming more promising techniques for the locomotor training in stroke patients. Achieving a functional walking level is one of the target of robotic gait training and it has been shown that Robotic-Assisted Gait Training (RAGT) improves walking function in stroke patients. Having a functional gait level may help the stroke patients to regain independence in ADLs and improve quality of life.
The purpose of the present study was to investigate the effects of RAGT on functional status, ADLs and health related quality of life.
Read the detailed description
Design:
Our study design was a randomized single-blind controlled study of 6 weeks including inpatient ambulatory subacute and chronic stroke patients. Sample size was calculated by Raosoft, Inc. Clinically meaningful difference was considered 20% for all outcome measures. The original sample size was estimated 45 patients to detect a statistically significant difference between groups. Considering the drop-out, fifty-one patient were included. The patients were randomly assigned to one of three training group by a researcher (ARO) using the function of Microsoft Office Excel software.
In this randomized-controlled study, eighty patients were assessed in terms of eligibility criteria, and 51 patients were included in the study. The patients were evaluated by two physiatrists in Istanbul Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Education and Research Hospital and referred to the Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation Unit of the same hospital. Enrollment period was between November 2014 and December 2015.
Blinding:
During the consent process, participants were advised that they would be randomized to one of three intervention groups. To minimize exposure between groups, the Robot-Assisted Gait Training and Conventional Training programs were administered in different sections of the rehabilitation center. The 2 trial physiotherapists could blinded to intervention group. All treatment schedules were planned by another researcher. All outcome assessments were conducted by a blinded assessor located offsite. Trial staff instructed participants to avoid mentioning anything about their intervention to the assessor. Patients were asked not to shear any information about treatment between each other.
- Being tested
- Robotic-Assisted Gait Training
- Keywords
- Rehabilitation, Gait, Ambulation, Exercise Therapy, Physical Exertion, Motor Skills
- Medical subject headings
- Stroke
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Robotic-Assisted Gait TrainingOther
There were three intervention arms in this study,
- Robotic-Assisted Gait Training,
- Conventional Training,
- Combined Training.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Conventional Training | No intervention | Conventional physical therapy consisted of neurophysiological concepts such as Bobath and Brunnstrom.Training sessions focused on static and dynamic postural tasks, improving lower and upper extremity range of motion, strengthening and overground walking. During walking training, emphasis was on distance walked than on gait quality. Symmetrical weight distribution was encouraged through verbal and tactile cues and was made more difficult by the addition of arm activities or actions requiring trunk rotation. In an effort to improve rhythmic weight-shifting ability, subjects practiced shifting their weight in forward and backward directions and side to side while performing reaching tasks. A session lasted 45 minutes, for 5 days per week for 6 weeks. |
| Robotic-Assisted Gait Training | Experimental | Lokomat (Hocoma) was used in Robotic-Assisted Gait Training group with 20 % body weight reduced. The participants walked on device at 1.8 km/h (0.5 m/sec) velocity. For each participant body weight portion was ensured by a security belt while walking. Each session took 45 minutes including setup, commands and rest time. Verbal instructions were used for encouragement but no manual assistance was given to improve gait. Robotic-Assisted Gait Training sessions lasted 45-minute sessions, 2 days a week during 6 weeks. Receives: Other: Robotic-Assisted Gait Training |
| Combined Training | No intervention | Combined Training consisted of inpatient participants who were treated with 45 minute-conventional training, 5 days a week during 6 weeks. Additionally this group had 45 minute-Robotic-Assisted Gait Training, 2 days a week during 6 weeks. |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
The Barthel Index (BI)
The BI was used to determine the level of independence in functional activities and included ten items. The score ranges from 0-100, and a higher BI score indicates better functioning. Minimal clinically important difference for BI is 18.5 points.
Measured: 6 weeks
The Stroke Specific Quality of Life Scale (SSQOL).
The Stroke Specific Quality of Life scale (SS-QOL) was used to address the ICF participation component.The score for the questionnaire is between 26 (lowest social participation) and 130 (highest social participation).
Measured: 6 weeks
The 6-Minute Walk Test (6MWT)
Walking function was assessed by distance walked in 6 minutes (6MWT).Usual ambulatory devices, lower-extremity orthotics, and stand-by assistance were permitted. Therapists closely guarded participants during gait testing, but did not provide physical assistance. For the 6-minute walk test, participants walked through continuous hallways with minimal foot traffic. End of the test walked distance recorded by meter.
Measured: 6 weeks
The Stair Climbing ascend and descend tests (SCas and SCde)
Participants climbed up and down 10 steps (measuring 18 cm in height), with or without the use of the rails and/or assistive devices. Subjects were asked to climb the stairs without skipping any steps, preferably using one foot for each step and descend without stopping. The time taken to climb up and down the 10 steps was recorded as a second.
Measured: 6 weeks
Secondary outcomes (4)
The Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA)
Lower limb impairment and balance were measured by Fugl-Meyer Lower Extremity Assessment (FMA-LE).FMA-LE consists of 17 items, with a maximum possible score of 34 points. Each item was answered using a 3-point ordinal scale (0 = cannot perform, 1 = can partially perform, 2 = can fully perform).
Measured: 6 weeks
The Comfortable 10-m Walk Test (CWT)
CWT was used to determine the speed of comfortable walking. The test was applied in a 14 meter-corridor. The patients were wanted to walk comfort and allowed to use walking aid. At 2nd meter the stopwatch was started and stopped when the patient reached the 12th meter. After three trials the average of the three trials was recorded as a second.
Measured: 6 weeks
Rate of Perceived Exertion (RPE)
Rate of Perceived Exertion was assessed at the end of 6 MWT and the patients were asked to identify their level of exertion between 6-20.All measurements of were performed before the intervention (baseline) and after the intervention (post treatment).
Measured: 6 weeks
The Fast 10-m Walk Test (FWT)
FWT was used to determine the speed of fast walking. The test was applied in a 14 meter-corridor. The patients were wanted to walk fast and allowed to use walking aid. At 2nd meter the stopwatch was started and stopped when the patient reached the 12th meter. After three trials the average of the three trials was recorded as a second.
Measured: 6 weeks
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted3 May 2016 (estimated)
- Study startNov 2014
- Primary completionFeb 2016
- Study completionMar 2016
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (14)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Cerebrovascular StrokeStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- 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
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 51 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Istanbul University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, RUSTEM MUSTAFAOGLU, Istanbul University
- Investigators
- IPEK YELDAN, Assoc.prof, Study director, Istanbul University, Faculty of Health Sciences, Division of Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation Istanbul, Turkey
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02759627
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- A-22
- Status last verified
- May 2016
- First submitted
- 29 Apr 2016
- Last updated
- 9 May 2016
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Belda-Lois JM, Mena-del Horno S, Bermejo-Bosch I, Moreno JC, Pons JL, Farina D, Iosa M, Molinari M, Tamburella F, Ramos A, Caria A, Solis-Escalante T, Brunner C, Rea M. Rehabilitation of gait after stroke: a review towards a top-down approach. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2011 Dec 13;8:66. doi: 10.1186/1743-0003-8-66.
PubMed 22165907Dombovy ML, Basford JR, Whisnant JP, Bergstralh EJ. Disability and use of rehabilitation services following stroke in Rochester, Minnesota, 1975-1979. Stroke. 1987 Sep-Oct;18(5):830-6. doi: 10.1161/01.str.18.5.830.
PubMed 3629639Schaechter JD. Motor rehabilitation and brain plasticity after hemiparetic stroke. Prog Neurobiol. 2004 May;73(1):61-72. doi: 10.1016/j.pneurobio.2004.04.001.
PubMed 15193779Mao YR, Lo WL, Lin Q, Li L, Xiao X, Raghavan P, Huang DF. The Effect of Body Weight Support Treadmill Training on Gait Recovery, Proximal Lower Limb Motor Pattern, and Balance in Patients with Subacute Stroke. Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:175719. doi: 10.1155/2015/175719. Epub 2015 Nov 16.
PubMed 26649295Borg G. Perceived exertion as an indicator of somatic stress. Scand J Rehabil Med. 1970;2(2):92-8. No abstract available.
PubMed 5523831ATS Committee on Proficiency Standards for Clinical Pulmonary Function Laboratories. ATS statement: guidelines for the six-minute walk test. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2002 Jul 1;166(1):111-7. doi: 10.1164/ajrccm.166.1.at1102. No abstract available.
PubMed 12091180Green J, Forster A, Young J. A test-retest reliability study of the Barthel Index, the Rivermead Mobility Index, the Nottingham Extended Activities of Daily Living Scale and the Frenchay Activities Index in stroke patients. Disabil Rehabil. 2001 Oct 15;23(15):670-6. doi: 10.1080/09638280110045382.
PubMed 11720117Silva SM, Correa FI, Faria CD, Correa JC. Comparison of quality-of-life instruments for assessing the participation after stroke based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Braz J Phys Ther. 2013 Sep-Oct;17(5):470-8. doi: 10.1590/S1413-35552012005000118. Epub 2013 Oct 21. English, Portuguese.
PubMed 24173349Silva SM, Correa FI, Faria CD, Correa JC. Psychometric properties of the stroke specific quality of life scale for the assessment of participation in stroke survivors using the rasch model: a preliminary study. J Phys Ther Sci. 2015 Feb;27(2):389-92. doi: 10.1589/jpts.27.389. Epub 2015 Feb 17.
PubMed 25729175Lennon S, Baxter D, Ashburn A. Physiotherapy based on the Bobath concept in stroke rehabilitation: a survey within the UK. Disabil Rehabil. 2001 Apr 15;23(6):254-62. doi: 10.1080/096382801750110892.
PubMed 11336098Visintin M, Barbeau H. The effects of body weight support on the locomotor pattern of spastic paretic patients. Can J Neurol Sci. 1989 Aug;16(3):315-25. doi: 10.1017/s0317167100029152.
PubMed 2766124Fugl-Meyer AR, Jaasko L, Leyman I, Olsson S, Steglind S. The post-stroke hemiplegic patient. 1. a method for evaluation of physical performance. Scand J Rehabil Med. 1975;7(1):13-31.
PubMed 1135616Hsieh YW, Wang CH, Wu SC, Chen PC, Sheu CF, Hsieh CL. Establishing the minimal clinically important difference of the Barthel Index in stroke patients. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2007 May-Jun;21(3):233-8. doi: 10.1177/1545968306294729. Epub 2007 Mar 9.
PubMed 17351082Mustafaoglu R, Demir R, Demirci AC, Yigit Z. Effects of core stabilization exercises on pulmonary function, respiratory muscle strength, and functional capacity in adolescents with substance use disorder: Randomized controlled trial. Pediatr Pulmonol. 2019 Jul;54(7):1002-1011. doi: 10.1002/ppul.24330. Epub 2019 Apr 26.
PubMed 31026384
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 9 May 2016. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Does Isolated Robotic-Assisted Gait Training Improve Functional Status, Daily Living And Quality Of Life In Stroke Patients?: A Single-Blinded Randomized Controlled Study
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02759627
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- A-22
- Keywords
- Rehabilitation, Gait, Ambulation, Exercise Therapy, Physical Exertion, Motor Skills
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 51 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Istanbul UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Nov 2014
- Primary completion
- Feb 2016 (actual)
- Study completion
- Mar 2016 (actual)
- First posted
- 3 May 2016 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Stroke is one of the major cause of morbidity and mortality and the leading cause of disability in adults all around the world. Stroke survivors can suffer several neurological impairments and deficits which have an important impact on patient's quality of life and which increase the costs for health and social services. After stroke, impairments in ADLs and functional status, deterioration in health related quality of life can be seen.
Although most of the stroke survivors experience some level of neurological recovery, nearly 50%-60% of stroke patients still experience some degree of motor impairment, and approximately 50% are at least partly dependent in activities-of-daily-living (ADL). Gait recovery, performing activities of daily living and regaining independence in ADLs are the main focus of stroke rehabilitation programs.
Robotic technologies are becoming more promising techniques for the locomotor training in stroke patients. Achieving a functional walking level is one of the target of robotic gait training and it has been shown that Robotic-Assisted Gait Training (RAGT) improves walking function in stroke patients. Having a functional gait level may help the stroke patients to regain independence in ADLs and improve quality of life.
The purpose of the present study was to investigate the effects of RAGT on functional status, ADLs and health related quality of life.
Detailed description
Design:
Our study design was a randomized single-blind controlled study of 6 weeks including inpatient ambulatory subacute and chronic stroke patients. Sample size was calculated by Raosoft, Inc. Clinically meaningful difference was considered 20% for all outcome measures. The original sample size was estimated 45 patients to detect a statistically significant difference between groups. Considering the drop-out, fifty-one patient were included. The patients were randomly assigned to one of three training group by a researcher (ARO) using the function of Microsoft Office Excel software.
In this randomized-controlled study, eighty patients were assessed in terms of eligibility criteria, and 51 patients were included in the study. The patients were evaluated by two physiatrists in Istanbul Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Education and Research Hospital and referred to the Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation Unit of the same hospital. Enrollment period was between November 2014 and December 2015.
Blinding:
During the consent process, participants were advised that they would be randomized to one of three intervention groups. To minimize exposure between groups, the Robot-Assisted Gait Training and Conventional Training programs were administered in different sections of the rehabilitation center. The 2 trial physiotherapists could blinded to intervention group. All treatment schedules were planned by another researcher. All outcome assessments were conducted by a blinded assessor located offsite. Trial staff instructed participants to avoid mentioning anything about their intervention to the assessor. Patients were asked not to shear any information about treatment between each other.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 3
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Conventional Training | No intervention | –Conventional physical therapy consisted of neurophysiological concepts such as Bobath and Brunnstrom.Training sessions focused on static and dynamic postural tasks, improving lower and upper extremity range of motion, strengthening and overground walking. During walking training, emphasis was on distance walked than on gait quality. Symmetrical weight distribution was encouraged through verbal and tactile cues and was made more difficult by the addition of arm activities or actions requiring trunk rotation. In an effort to improve rhythmic weight-shifting ability, subjects practiced shifting their weight in forward and backward directions and side to side while performing reaching tasks. A session lasted 45 minutes, for 5 days per week for 6 weeks. |
| Robotic-Assisted Gait Training | Experimental | Other: Robotic-Assisted Gait TrainingLokomat (Hocoma) was used in Robotic-Assisted Gait Training group with 20 % body weight reduced. The participants walked on device at 1.8 km/h (0.5 m/sec) velocity. For each participant body weight portion was ensured by a security belt while walking. Each session took 45 minutes including setup, commands and rest time. Verbal instructions were used for encouragement but no manual assistance was given to improve gait. Robotic-Assisted Gait Training sessions lasted 45-minute sessions, 2 days a week during 6 weeks. |
| Combined Training | No intervention | –Combined Training consisted of inpatient participants who were treated with 45 minute-conventional training, 5 days a week during 6 weeks. Additionally this group had 45 minute-Robotic-Assisted Gait Training, 2 days a week during 6 weeks. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 75 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (6 listed)
- diagnosis of a stroke (at least 3 months),
- ambulatory with or without the use of an assistive device or ankle-foot orthosis,
- 3 or higher grades in Functional Ambulation Category,
- able to walk 10 meters with or without supervision,
- able to follow verbal instructions,
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- previous stroke history,
- any other neurologic disorders, complications from other health conditions (cardiovascular or musculoskeletal conditions),
- contracture or muscle tonus ≥ 3 according to Modified Ashworth Scale, preventing range of motion in lower extremity,
- severe osteoporosis,
- cognitive deficit preventing them from following instructions.
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-Assisted Gait TrainingThere were three intervention arms in this study, 1. Robotic-Assisted Gait Training, 2. Conventional Training, 3. Combined Training. | Other | Robotic-Assisted Gait Training |
Primary outcome
The Barthel Index (BI)
Time frame: 6 weeks
The BI was used to determine the level of independence in functional activities and included ten items. The score ranges from 0-100, and a higher BI score indicates better functioning. Minimal clinically important difference for BI is 18.5 points.
The Stroke Specific Quality of Life Scale (SSQOL).
Time frame: 6 weeks
The Stroke Specific Quality of Life scale (SS-QOL) was used to address the ICF participation component.The score for the questionnaire is between 26 (lowest social participation) and 130 (highest social participation).
The 6-Minute Walk Test (6MWT)
Time frame: 6 weeks
Walking function was assessed by distance walked in 6 minutes (6MWT).Usual ambulatory devices, lower-extremity orthotics, and stand-by assistance were permitted. Therapists closely guarded participants during gait testing, but did not provide physical assistance. For the 6-minute walk test, participants walked through continuous hallways with minimal foot traffic. End of the test walked distance recorded by meter.
The Stair Climbing ascend and descend tests (SCas and SCde)
Time frame: 6 weeks
Participants climbed up and down 10 steps (measuring 18 cm in height), with or without the use of the rails and/or assistive devices. Subjects were asked to climb the stairs without skipping any steps, preferably using one foot for each step and descend without stopping. The time taken to climb up and down the 10 steps was recorded as a second.
4 secondary outcomes
The Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA)
Time frame: 6 weeks
The Comfortable 10-m Walk Test (CWT)
Time frame: 6 weeks
Rate of Perceived Exertion (RPE)
Time frame: 6 weeks
The Fast 10-m Walk Test (FWT)
Time frame: 6 weeks
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 9 May 2016.
- Background: PubMed 22165907Belda-Lois JM, Mena-del Horno S, Bermejo-Bosch I, Moreno JC, Pons JL, Farina D, Iosa M, Molinari M, Tamburella F, Ramos A, Caria A, Solis-Escalante T, Brunner C, Rea M. Rehabilitation of gait after stroke: a review towards a top-down approach. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2011 Dec 13;8:66. doi: 10.1186/1743-0003-8-66.
- Background: PubMed 3629639Dombovy ML, Basford JR, Whisnant JP, Bergstralh EJ. Disability and use of rehabilitation services following stroke in Rochester, Minnesota, 1975-1979. Stroke. 1987 Sep-Oct;18(5):830-6. doi: 10.1161/01.str.18.5.830.
- Background: PubMed 15193779Schaechter JD. Motor rehabilitation and brain plasticity after hemiparetic stroke. Prog Neurobiol. 2004 May;73(1):61-72. doi: 10.1016/j.pneurobio.2004.04.001.
- Background: PubMed 26649295Mao YR, Lo WL, Lin Q, Li L, Xiao X, Raghavan P, Huang DF. The Effect of Body Weight Support Treadmill Training on Gait Recovery, Proximal Lower Limb Motor Pattern, and Balance in Patients with Subacute Stroke. Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:175719. doi: 10.1155/2015/175719. Epub 2015 Nov 16.
- Background: PubMed 5523831Borg G. Perceived exertion as an indicator of somatic stress. Scand J Rehabil Med. 1970;2(2):92-8. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 12091180ATS Committee on Proficiency Standards for Clinical Pulmonary Function Laboratories. ATS statement: guidelines for the six-minute walk test. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2002 Jul 1;166(1):111-7. doi: 10.1164/ajrccm.166.1.at1102. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 11720117Green J, Forster A, Young J. A test-retest reliability study of the Barthel Index, the Rivermead Mobility Index, the Nottingham Extended Activities of Daily Living Scale and the Frenchay Activities Index in stroke patients. Disabil Rehabil. 2001 Oct 15;23(15):670-6. doi: 10.1080/09638280110045382.
- Background: PubMed 24173349Silva SM, Correa FI, Faria CD, Correa JC. Comparison of quality-of-life instruments for assessing the participation after stroke based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Braz J Phys Ther. 2013 Sep-Oct;17(5):470-8. doi: 10.1590/S1413-35552012005000118. Epub 2013 Oct 21. English, Portuguese.
- Background: PubMed 25729175Silva SM, Correa FI, Faria CD, Correa JC. Psychometric properties of the stroke specific quality of life scale for the assessment of participation in stroke survivors using the rasch model: a preliminary study. J Phys Ther Sci. 2015 Feb;27(2):389-92. doi: 10.1589/jpts.27.389. Epub 2015 Feb 17.
- Background: PubMed 11336098Lennon S, Baxter D, Ashburn A. Physiotherapy based on the Bobath concept in stroke rehabilitation: a survey within the UK. Disabil Rehabil. 2001 Apr 15;23(6):254-62. doi: 10.1080/096382801750110892.
- Background: PubMed 2766124Visintin M, Barbeau H. The effects of body weight support on the locomotor pattern of spastic paretic patients. Can J Neurol Sci. 1989 Aug;16(3):315-25. doi: 10.1017/s0317167100029152.
- Background: PubMed 1135616Fugl-Meyer AR, Jaasko L, Leyman I, Olsson S, Steglind S. The post-stroke hemiplegic patient. 1. a method for evaluation of physical performance. Scand J Rehabil Med. 1975;7(1):13-31.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Cerebrovascular Stroke
Recruiting
Connectomic Alterations Following Acute Ischemic Stroke in the MCA Territory
Ischemic Stroke
RecruitingObservational study
Clevidipine for the Antihypertensive Treatment of Acute Intracerebral Hemorrhage
Intracerebral Hemorrhage, Stroke
Active, not recruitingPhase 4
A Study Testing How Well the Drug Extract of Ginkgo Biloba Leaves Tablets Works for People With Memory or Thinking Problems After a Stroke When Added to Standard Treatment
Ischemic Stroke Hospitalized, Impairment, Cognitive
Not yet recruitingPhase 4
Anti-inflammatory and Anti-thrombotic Therapy With colcHicine and Low Dose Rivaroxaban for Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events Reduction in Ischemic Stroke
Ischemic Stroke
RecruitingObservational study
CoMind Early Feasibility Study
Intracranial Pressure, Intracranial Pressure Changes
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.
IPEK YELDAN, Assoc.prof study director
Istanbul University, Faculty of Health Sciences, Division of Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation Istanbul, Turkey
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Robotic-Assisted Gait Training in people with Cerebrovascular Stroke and Cerebrovascular Accident, run by Istanbul University.
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 6 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 9 May 2016. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
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?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
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?
The Barthel Index (BI) (time frame: 6 weeks). The study lists 4 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT02759627, which also lists 14 linked publications.
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 9 May 2016.