AzTrials
AzTrials

Cerebral PalsyNCT05423171

Intensive Bimanual Intervention in Cerebral Palsy Children

A study testing Intensive bimanual therapy in people with Cerebral Palsy, run by Laval University at 1 site in Canada.

Recruiting

Looking for participants now. Contact the study team or a site below to ask about taking part.

Sites and contacts
Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

Motor disorders related to cerebral palsy are often accompanied by sensory, cognitive, perceptive, communication and behavioural impairments. It has already been shown that intensive bimanual intervention can improve arm movement, but its impact on the spontaneous use of the most affected arm in everyday life remains… Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 6 to 17 years
Conditions the study is for
Cerebral Palsy
What is being tested?
Intensive bimanual therapy
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
30 participants
Where
1 siteCanada
Study dates
30 Jun 2021to 30 Jan 2027
Phase
Interventional
Are there results?
Not yet: the study is under way

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 6 to 17 years
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Child

Who may be able to join

  • Having a diagnosis of cerebral palsy or spastic hemiparesis encephalopathy
  • Having sensorimotor deficits of one or both upper limb (spastic hemiparesis with a dominance on one side of the body; Manual Ability Classification System (MACS) level
  • 1, 2 or 3);
  • Having cognitive capacities to understand and perform task of the study.

Who cannot join

  • Presenting other significant health problem which may interfere with the requested task or with the clinical intervention;
  • Having Botox injection in one or both upper limbs with the 4 months prior to the intervention;
  • Presenting significant uncorrected visual deficits.
  • N.B. Having a ferromagnetic implant is not an exclusion criterion, such participant will be eligible but will not perform the MRI.

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.

Catherine Mercier, PhD;OT contact

141852991416701

catherine.mercier@rea.ulaval.ca

Canada1 site, 1 recruiting
  • Université Laval

    Québec, G1V 0A6

    Mercier Catherine, Ph.D.;O.T., 141852991416701, catherine.mercier@rea.ulaval.ca

    Recruiting

Other trials in Canada

About this study

Official title: Predictors of Response to an Intensive Bimanual Intervention in Children With Cerebral Palsy

Motor disorders related to cerebral palsy are often accompanied by sensory, cognitive, perceptive, communication and behavioural impairments. It has already been shown that intensive bimanual intervention can improve arm movement, but its impact on the spontaneous use of the most affected arm in everyday life remains to be established. This project aims to understand the impacts of an intensive bimanual therapy on uni- and bi-manual motor functions as well as the spontaneous use of the most affected arm. Predictive value of neuroimaging variables will also be assessed.

Read the detailed description

Most activities of everyday life require the use of both hands in a coordinated manner. Motor disorders related to cerebral palsy lead to activity limitations due to motor function disturbances. It has already been shown that intensive bimanual intervention can improve arm movement, but its impact on the spontaneous use of the most affected arm in everyday life remains to be established. This project aims to understand the impacts of intensive bimanual therapy on the motor functions of both arms (working together or in isolation) as well as on the spontaneous use of the most affected limb. Predictive value of neuroimaging variables will also be assessed. Thirty children living with cerebral palsy will be recruited over a 5-year period. The intervention consists of a day camp, where a small group of participants will be stimulated (one worker per child) to do activities using both hands 6 hours/day for 10 days. There will be three periods of evaluation (pre-intervention, post-intervention and 6-month follow-up). These evaluation periods consist of neuroimaging assessment, clinical evaluation, robotic evaluation and movement evaluation using inertial control units. The use of more accurate measurements of sensorimotor arm functions using robotic systems will clarify the relationship between measurements of brain function and clinical improvements, to better understand the significant variability observed in response to interventions.

Conditions
Cerebral Palsy
Being tested
Intensive bimanual therapy
Keywords
Intensive bimanual therapy, Upper limb motor function, Rehabilitation, Motor learning, Accelerometry
Medical subject headings
Cerebral Palsy

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • Intensive bimanual therapyOther

    60-hour intensive therapy promoting the use of both hands (ex: bimanual activities, games,...)

Study groups in NCT05423171
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
MANUSExperimentalChildren and youth living with cerebral palsy will take part in a 60-hour intensive bimanual therapy at Peps at Université Laval, during which they will play games and exercise to promote spontaneous use of the most affected hand. Participants will take part to pre-evaluation and 1-week and 6-month post-intervention.
Receives: Other: Intensive bimanual therapy

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)

    Neurophysiological evaluation

    Measured: Measured prior to the intervention.

  2. Robotic evaluation - Visually guided reaching

    The participant must reach as quickly and accurately as possible 4 targets spread over a radius of 10 cm around the starting target, presented in a pseudo-random order (total of 32 reaching movements)

    Measured: Measured prior to the intervention.

  3. Robotic evaluation - Visually guided reaching

    The participant must reach as quickly and accurately as possible 4 targets spread over a radius of 10 cm around the starting target, presented in a pseudo-random order (total of 32 reaching movements)

    Measured: Measured one week post-intervention.

  4. Robotic evaluation - Visually guided reaching

    The participant must reach as quickly and accurately as possible 4 targets spread over a radius of 10 cm around the starting target, presented in a pseudo-random order (total of 32 reaching movements)

    Measured: Measured 6-month post-intervention.

  5. Robotic evaluation - Object hit

    The participant must hit the balls with the hand of they choice, each successful contact generating haptic feedback.

    Measured: Measured prior to the intervention.

  6. Robotic evaluation - Object hit

    The participant must hit the balls with the hand of they choice, each successful contact generating haptic feedback.

    Measured: Measured one week post-intervention.

  7. Robotic evaluation - Object hit

    The participant must hit the balls with the hand of they choice, each successful contact generating haptic feedback.

    Measured: Measured 6-month post-intervention.

  8. Robotic evaluation - Ball on bar

    Four targets are successively presented to the participant, the objective of the task is to move the ball into each target as quickly and accurately as possible.

    Measured: Measured prior to the intervention.

  9. Robotic evaluation - Ball on bar

    Four targets are successively presented to the participant, the objective of the task is to move the ball into each target as quickly and accurately as possible.

    Measured: Measured one week post-intervention.

  10. Robotic evaluation - Ball on bar

    Four targets are successively presented to the participant, the objective of the task is to move the ball into each target as quickly and accurately as possible.

    Measured: Measured 6-month post-intervention.

  11. Robotic evaluation - Arm-position matching

    In this proprioception task the sense of upper limb position is evaluated

    Measured: Measured prior to the intervention.

  12. Robotic evaluation - Arm-position matching

    In this proprioception task the sense of upper limb position is evaluated

    Measured: Measured one week post-intervention.

  13. Robotic evaluation - Arm-position matching

    In this proprioception task the sense of upper limb position is evaluated

    Measured: Measured 6-month post-intervention.

  14. Spontaneous use of both arms

    The unilateral and bilateral functions will be quantified by summing the activities detected at the upper limbs with accelerometers, allowing to obtain use-ratio of each limb.

    Measured: Measured during two-days prior to the intervention.

  15. Spontaneous use of both arms

    The unilateral and bilateral functions will be quantified by summing the activities detected at the upper limbs with accelerometers, allowing to obtain use-ratio of each limb.

    Measured: Measured two days during the intervention.

  16. Spontaneous use of both arms

    The unilateral and bilateral functions will be quantified by summing the activities detected at the upper limbs with accelerometers, allowing to obtain use-ratio of each limb.

    Measured: Measured during two-days one week post-intervention.

  17. Spontaneous use of both arms

    The unilateral and bilateral functions will be quantified by summing the activities detected at the upper limbs with accelerometers, allowing to obtain use-ratio of each limb.

    Measured: Measured during two-days 6-month post-intervention.

  18. Clinical evaluation -Two-point discrimination test (TPDT)

    Sensitive test to determine tactile threshold

    Measured: Measured prior to the intervention.

  19. Clinical evaluation -Two-point discrimination test (TPDT)

    Sensitive test to determine tactile threshold

    Measured: Measured one week post-intervention.

  20. Clinical evaluation -Two-point discrimination test (TPDT)

    Sensitive test to determine tactile threshold.

    Measured: Measured 6-month post-intervention.

  21. Clinical evaluation - Jebsen Taylor Test of Hand Function (JTTHF)

    Seven standardized tasks to evaluate the unimanual function. 6 tasks. Sub-task score is the time to complete the task (a maximum of 120s is allowed per task) and the total score is the total time to perform the six tasks (maximum of 720s). Higher time means worse outcome.

    Measured: Measured prior to the intervention.

  22. Clinical evaluation - Jebsen Taylor Test of Hand Function (JTTHF)

    Seven standardized tasks to evaluate the unimanual function. 6 tasks. Sub-task score is the time to complete the task (a maximum of 120s is allowed per task) and the total score is the total time to perform the six tasks (maximum of 720s). Higher time means worse outcome.

    Measured: Measured one week post-intervention.

  23. Clinical evaluation - Jebsen Taylor Test of Hand Function (JTTHF)

    Seven standardized tasks to evaluate the unimanual function

    Measured: Measured 6-month post-intervention.

  24. Clinical evaluation - Box and Blocks Test (BBT)

    Measurement of manual dexterity of each hand. The participant must take one block at a time with one hand to transfer it to the other side of the box.

    Measured: Measured prior to the intervention.

  25. Clinical evaluation - Box and Blocks Test (BBT)

    Measurement of manual dexterity of each hand. The participant must take one block at a time with one hand to transfer it to the other side of the box.

    Measured: Measured one week post-intervention.

  26. Clinical evaluation - Box and Blocks Test (BBT)

    Measurement of manual dexterity of each hand. The participant must take one block at a time with one hand to transfer it to the other side of the box.

    Measured: Measured 6-month post-intervention.

  27. Clinical evaluation - Assisting Hand Assessment (AHA)

    This test consists of standardized tasks with toys during a semi-structured game session. The test is recorded, and the video is analyzed and scored later. Logit-based 0 to 100 AHA-unit scale (score 0-100; better score means better outcome).

    Measured: Measured prior to the intervention.

  28. Clinical evaluation - Assisting Hand Assessment (AHA)

    This test consists of standardized tasks with toys during a semi-structured game session. The test is recorded, and the video is analyzed and scored later. Logit-based 0 to 100 AHA-unit scale (score 0-100; better score means better outcome).

    Measured: Measured one week post-intervention.

  29. Clinical evaluation - Assisting Hand Assessment (AHA)

    This test consists of standardized tasks with toys during a semi-structured game session. The test is recorded, and the video is analyzed and scored later. Logit-based 0 to 100 AHA-unit scale (score 0-100; better score means better outcome).

    Measured: Measured 6-month post-intervention.

  30. Clinical evaluation - Two-Arm Coordination Test (TACT)

    Evaluation of the constrained bilateral use of both upper limbs with an electronic tracking device (eight tests; four clockwise and four counter-clockwise).

    Measured: Measured prior to the intervention.

  31. Clinical evaluation - Two-Arm Coordination Test (TACT)

    Evaluation of the constrained bilateral use of both upper limbs with an electronic tracking device (eight tests; four clockwise and four counter-clockwise).

    Measured: Measured one week post-intervention.

  32. Clinical evaluation - Two-Arm Coordination Test (TACT)

    Evaluation of the constrained bilateral use of both upper limbs with an electronic tracking device (eight tests; four clockwise and four counter-clockwise).

    Measured: Measured 6-month post-intervention.

  33. Clinical evaluation - Motor-Free Visual Perception Test-Revised (MVPT-R)

    Visual perception test that assesses consistency of form, spatial orientation, discrimination, memory and visual closure (Score: 0 - 40; better score means better outcome).

    Measured: Measured prior to the intervention.

  34. Clinical evaluation - Motor-Free Visual Perception Test-Revised (MVPT-R)

    Visual perception test that assesses consistency of form, spatial orientation, discrimination, memory and visual closure (Score: 0 - 40; better score means better outcome).

    Measured: Measured one week post-intervention.

  35. Clinical evaluation - Motor-Free Visual Perception Test-Revised (MVPT-R)

    Visual perception test that assesses consistency of form, spatial orientation, discrimination, memory and visual closure (Score: 0 - 40; better score means better outcome).

    Measured: Measured 6-month post-intervention.

Secondary outcomes (6)
  1. Self-assessments - Children's Hand-use Experience Questionnaire (CHEQ)

    CHEQ is a 29 item child-completed questionnaire that examines how the weaker/affected limb is used in everyday activities. It presents a list of common daily activities that typically require use of two hands. The child then rates the time required, the efficacy of grasp, and how bothered they feel by their hand function on the task. Total score transformed by a Rasch analysis into a scale of 0-100 units (better score means better outcome).

    Measured: Measured prior to the intervention.

  2. Self-assessments - Children's Hand-use Experience Questionnaire (CHEQ)

    CHEQ is a 29 item child-completed questionnaire that examines how the weaker/affected limb is used in everyday activities. It presents a list of common daily activities that typically require use of two hands. The child then rates the time required, the efficacy of grasp, and how bothered they feel by their hand function on the task. Total score transformed by a Rasch analysis into a scale of 0-100 units (better score means better outcome).

    Measured: Measured one week post-intervention.

  3. Self-assessments - Children's Hand-use Experience Questionnaire (CHEQ)

    CHEQ is a 29 item child-completed questionnaire that examines how the weaker/affected limb is used in everyday activities. It presents a list of common daily activities that typically require use of two hands. The child then rates the time required, the efficacy of grasp, and how bothered they feel by their hand function on the task. Total score transformed by a Rasch analysis into a scale of 0-100 units (better score means better outcome).

    Measured: Measured 6-month post-intervention.

  4. Self-assessments - Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM)

    Prior to the intervention, children, parents and therapists will work together to set a therapy goal related to their hand or wrist function. The child will score their current performance/satisfaction on the identified activity and will re-score post-intervention. Performance: scale from 0 to 10, better the score is better is the outcome. Satisfaction: scale from 0 to 10, better the score is better is the outcome.

    Measured: Measured prior to the intervention.

  5. Self-assessments - Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM)

    Prior to the intervention, children, parents and therapists will work together to set a therapy goal related to their hand or wrist function. The child will score their current performance/satisfaction on the identified activity and will re-score post-intervention.Performance: scale from 0 to 10, better the score is better is the outcome. Satisfaction: scale from 0 to 10, better the score is better is the outcome.

    Measured: Measured one week post-intervention.

  6. Self-assessments - Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM)

    Prior to the intervention, children, parents and therapists will work together to set a therapy goal related to their hand or wrist function. The child will score their current performance/satisfaction on the identified activity and will re-score post-intervention. Performance: scale from 0 to 10, better the score is better is the outcome. Satisfaction: scale from 0 to 10, better the score is better is the outcome.

    Measured: Measured 6-month post-intervention.

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted21 Jun 2022
  2. Study start30 Jun 2021
  3. Primary completion30 Jan 2027 (estimated)
  4. Study completion30 Jan 2027 (estimated)

Resources

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
30 participants (estimated)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT05423171
Sponsor's protocol ID
Manœuvre
Status last verified
Jun 2022
First submitted
25 May 2022
Last updated
21 Jun 2022
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing Intensive bimanual therapy in people with Cerebral Palsy, run by Laval University at 1 site in Canada.

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 4 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: looking for participants now, as of the sponsor's last update on 21 Jun 2022. 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 Canada. 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?

This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

Contact Catherine Mercier, PhD;OT (141852991416701, catherine.mercier@rea.ulaval.ca), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) (time frame: Measured prior to the intervention.). The study lists 35 primary outcomes in all. 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 21 Jun 2022.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in