StrokeNCT07590245
Comparative Effects of Sensorimotor Interventions on Hand Performance With Stroke
A study testing Sensory and Motor Exercise Group, The Sensory Exercise Group and The Motor Exercise Group in people with Stroke and Hand, run by Atlas University at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye).
Trial summary
This randomized controlled trial investigated the comparative effects of sensory, motor, and combined sensorimotor interventions on hand motor function and behavioral performance in patients with stroke. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 45 to 65 years
- What is being tested?
- Sensory and Motor Exercise Group, The Sensory Exercise Group and The Motor Exercise Group
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 81 participants
- Where
- 1 siteTurkey (Türkiye)
- Study dates
- 6 Mar 2026to 1 May 2026
- 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 45 to 65 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Having the ability to verbally communicate to answer questions
- Willingness to participate in the study
- Having read and signed the informed consent form
Who cannot join
- Having joint movement restriction in the upper extremity
- Presence of skin injury or scarring on the hand or wrist
- History of surgery on the upper extremity
- Having an orthopedic problem in the upper extremity
- Having a rheumatic disease
- Having a neurological condition in the upper extremity
- Having a severe mental or cognitive impairment
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Turkey (Türkiye)1 site
Istanbul Atlas University
Kâğıthane, Istanbul, 34408
About this study
Official title: Comparative Effects of Sensorimotor Interventions on Hand Motor Function and Performance in Patients With Stroke
This randomized controlled trial investigated the comparative effects of sensory, motor, and combined sensorimotor interventions on hand motor function and behavioral performance in patients with stroke. The study focused on upper-extremity impairments, particularly deficits in hand strength, dexterity, and reaction time, which are common following stroke and substantially limit functional independence. Sensorimotor integration plays a critical role in motor recovery, as effective hand function depends on the interaction between sensory feedback and motor control mechanisms.
Participants with stroke were randomly assigned to sensory, motor, or combined sensorimotor intervention groups. The interventions were designed to target tactile perception, motor coordination, and integrated sensorimotor processing through attended active and passive stimulation approaches. Outcome measures included hand grip strength, manual dexterity, and reaction time, which were evaluated before and after the intervention period.
The findings demonstrated that sensorimotor-based rehabilitation approaches positively influenced upper-extremity motor performance and behavioral responses in stroke patients. In particular, combined sensorimotor interventions appeared to provide more comprehensive improvements by simultaneously enhancing sensory processing and motor execution. These results support the importance of integrating sensory-focused strategies into conventional motor rehabilitation programs to optimize neuroplasticity and functional recovery after stroke. The study contributes to the growing evidence supporting multidimensional rehabilitation approaches for improving hand function and sensorimotor performance in individuals with stroke.
- Being tested
- Sensory and Motor Exercise Group, The Sensory Exercise Group, The Motor Exercise Group
- Keywords
- hand, exercise, stroke, muscle strength
- Medical subject headings
- Stroke, Motor Activity
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Sensory and Motor Exercise GroupOther
In the Combined Sensorimotor Group (CSMG), sensory and motor exercises were applied according to the protocols used in the Sensory Exercise Group (SEG) and Motor Exercise Group (MEG). However, each exercise was performed as a single set, with the remaining session time allocated to superficial massage and sensory stimulation. The sensory and motor components were administered sequentially, with each phase lasting approximately 7-8 minutes to maintain temporal balance within the session.
The Sensory Exercise GroupOther
The Sensory Exercise Group (SEG) participated in an intervention designed to enhance sensory awareness and integration. The protocol included tactile stimuli such as sand, sensory balls, fabrics with different textures, multisensory gels, brushing, vibration, and superficial massage to stimulate cutaneous receptors and enrich sensory input. Massage was applied with the participant in a supine position, elbows extended, and hands in a neutral position. All sessions were standardized using a digital stopwatch, and each intervention lasted approximately 15 minutes with equal time allocation across groups. This standardized timing ensured that observed effects were related to the intervention content rather than differences in exposure duration.
The Motor Exercise GroupOther
The Motor Exercise Group (MEG) performed structured hand exercises including active range of motion exercises for the wrist and fingers, grip strengthening, stabilization exercises, and wrist flexion-extension exercises using elastic bands and dumbbells. Resistance levels were adjusted according to participant tolerance, and the protocol was applied only to the dominant side. Each exercise consisted of 5-7 repetitions and two sets, with 30-second rest intervals between sets.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Sensory Exercise Group | Experimental | Not described Receives: Other: The Sensory Exercise Group |
| Motor Exercise Group | Experimental | Not described Receives: Other: The Motor Exercise Group |
| Combined Sensory and Motor Exercise Group | Experimental | Not described Receives: Other: Sensory and Motor Exercise Group |
| Control | No intervention | The control group did not receive any additional treatments during the study period, allowing for a clear comparison between the experimental group and the baseline conditions. |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Moberg Pick-up Test (MPUT)
Hand function was evaluated using the Moberg Pick-up Test (MPUT), a standardized method for assessing functional hand use and fine-motor skills, specifically measuring the ability to grasp and manipulate small objects. During the test, participants were instructed to pick up various small objects (e.g., coins and small blocks) and place them in a container as quickly as possible. During the test, the participants were instructed to pick up various small objects and place them in a container as quickly as possible. The assessment was conducted with the dominant hand, first with eyes open and then with eyes closed, to test sensory function. For each condition, the test was repeated three times, and the best performance time, recorded in seconds, was used for analysis. The objects used in the test were of similar size and required coordinated hand movements for successful completion, ensuring consistency in task difficulty
Measured: immediately after the intervention
Muscle Reaction Time
Light Trainer® system, which consists of a wireless lighting system with LED pods and a central controller. The participants were seated with their hands on the table, 40 cm apart, palms down, and elbows at 90°. The Light Trainer was positioned centrally 20 cm away from each hand. When the pod was illuminated, the participants were instructed to turn off the light as quickly as possible by touching it. Light activation was randomized to avoid predictability, requiring participants to respond based on light cues each time. In the first task, the participants used their dominant hand to turn off the light as quickly as possible. In the second task, they responded to a light signal by deactivating a predetermined light from two different colors using their dominant hand. Scale Range: No minimum or maximum value in milliseconds (lower time is better). Interpretation: Lower reaction times signify better outcomes, as they reflect faster muscle response to visual stimuli.
Measured: immediately after the intervention
Grip Strength (Measured Using Jamar Electronic Dynamometer)
Hand performance was assessed based on grip strength using a Takei Handheld Dynamometer (Takei Scientific Instruments Co., Tokyo, Japan). Participants were seated with elbows flexed at 90 degrees and forearms in a neutral position, and were instructed to squeeze the dynamometer with maximum force for 3-5 seconds, with the palm facing upwards. Each hand was tested three times with a 20-second rest between trials, and the highest value was recorded. This protocol ensures standardized and consistent results, with measurements documented in kilograms (kg) to provide reliable grip strength assessment. Scale Range: The dynamometer measures from 0 to 90 kg. Interpretation: Higher scores reflect stronger grip strength, which is indicative of better hand function.
Measured: immediately after the intervention
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted15 May 2026
- Study start6 Mar 2026
- Primary completion25 Apr 2026
- Study completion1 May 2026
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for 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
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Participant
- Enrolment
- 81 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Atlas University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Gamze Demircioğlu, Atlas University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07590245
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 2024-ATLAS-MSEHF-005
- Status last verified
- Mar 2026
- First submitted
- 11 May 2026
- Last updated
- 18 May 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 18 May 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Comparative Effects of Sensorimotor Interventions on Hand Motor Function and Performance in Patients With Stroke
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07590245
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 2024-ATLAS-MSEHF-005
- Keywords
- hand, exercise, stroke, muscle strength
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 81 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Atlas UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 6 Mar 2026 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 25 Apr 2026 (actual)
- Study completion
- 1 May 2026 (actual)
- First posted
- 15 May 2026 (actual)
- 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.
This randomized controlled trial investigated the comparative effects of sensory, motor, and combined sensorimotor interventions on hand motor function and behavioral performance in patients with stroke. The study focused on upper-extremity impairments, particularly deficits in hand strength, dexterity, and reaction time, which are common following stroke and substantially limit functional independence. Sensorimotor integration plays a critical role in motor recovery, as effective hand function depends on the interaction between sensory feedback and motor control mechanisms.
Participants with stroke were randomly assigned to sensory, motor, or combined sensorimotor intervention groups. The interventions were designed to target tactile perception, motor coordination, and integrated sensorimotor processing through attended active and passive stimulation approaches. Outcome measures included hand grip strength, manual dexterity, and reaction time, which were evaluated before and after the intervention period.
The findings demonstrated that sensorimotor-based rehabilitation approaches positively influenced upper-extremity motor performance and behavioral responses in stroke patients. In particular, combined sensorimotor interventions appeared to provide more comprehensive improvements by simultaneously enhancing sensory processing and motor execution. These results support the importance of integrating sensory-focused strategies into conventional motor rehabilitation programs to optimize neuroplasticity and functional recovery after stroke. The study contributes to the growing evidence supporting multidimensional rehabilitation approaches for improving hand function and sensorimotor performance in individuals with stroke.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (participant)
- Number of arms
- 4
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Sensory Exercise Group | Experimental | Other: The Sensory Exercise Group |
| Motor Exercise Group | Experimental | Other: The Motor Exercise Group |
| Combined Sensory and Motor Exercise Group | Experimental | Other: Sensory and Motor Exercise Group |
| Control | No intervention | –The control group did not receive any additional treatments during the study period, allowing for a clear comparison between the experimental group and the baseline conditions. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 45 to 65 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Having the ability to verbally communicate to answer questions
- Willingness to participate in the study
- Having read and signed the informed consent form
Key exclusion criteria (7 listed)
- Having joint movement restriction in the upper extremity
- Presence of skin injury or scarring on the hand or wrist
- History of surgery on the upper extremity
- Having an orthopedic problem in the upper extremity
- Having a rheumatic disease
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Sensory and Motor Exercise GroupIn the Combined Sensorimotor Group (CSMG), sensory and motor exercises were applied according to the protocols used in the Sensory Exercise Group (SEG) and Motor Exercise Group (MEG). However, each exercise was performed as a single set, with the remaining session time allocated to superficial massage and sensory stimulation. The sensory and motor components were administered sequentially, with each phase lasting approximately 7-8 minutes to maintain temporal balance within the session. | Other | Combined Sensory and Motor Exercise Group |
| The Sensory Exercise GroupThe Sensory Exercise Group (SEG) participated in an intervention designed to enhance sensory awareness and integration. The protocol included tactile stimuli such as sand, sensory balls, fabrics with different textures, multisensory gels, brushing, vibration, and superficial massage to stimulate cutaneous receptors and enrich sensory input. Massage was applied with the participant in a supine position, elbows extended, and hands in a neutral position. All sessions were standardized using a digital stopwatch, and each intervention lasted approximately 15 minutes with equal time allocation across groups. This standardized timing ensured that observed effects were related to the intervention content rather than differences in exposure duration. | Other | Sensory Exercise Group |
| The Motor Exercise GroupThe Motor Exercise Group (MEG) performed structured hand exercises including active range of motion exercises for the wrist and fingers, grip strengthening, stabilization exercises, and wrist flexion-extension exercises using elastic bands and dumbbells. Resistance levels were adjusted according to participant tolerance, and the protocol was applied only to the dominant side. Each exercise consisted of 5-7 repetitions and two sets, with 30-second rest intervals between sets. | Other | Motor Exercise Group |
Primary outcome
Moberg Pick-up Test (MPUT)
Time frame: immediately after the intervention
Hand function was evaluated using the Moberg Pick-up Test (MPUT), a standardized method for assessing functional hand use and fine-motor skills, specifically measuring the ability to grasp and manipulate small objects. During the test, participants were instructed to pick up various small objects (e.g., coins and small blocks) and place them in a container as quickly as possible. During the test, the participants were instructed to pick up various small objects and place them in a container as quickly as possible. The assessment was conducted with the dominant hand, first with eyes open and then with eyes closed, to test sensory function. For each condition, the test was repeated three times, and the best performance time, recorded in seconds, was used for analysis. The objects used in the test were of similar size and required coordinated hand movements for successful completion, ensuring consistency in task difficulty
Muscle Reaction Time
Time frame: immediately after the intervention
Light Trainer® system, which consists of a wireless lighting system with LED pods and a central controller. The participants were seated with their hands on the table, 40 cm apart, palms down, and elbows at 90°. The Light Trainer was positioned centrally 20 cm away from each hand. When the pod was illuminated, the participants were instructed to turn off the light as quickly as possible by touching it. Light activation was randomized to avoid predictability, requiring participants to respond based on light cues each time. In the first task, the participants used their dominant hand to turn off the light as quickly as possible. In the second task, they responded to a light signal by deactivating a predetermined light from two different colors using their dominant hand. Scale Range: No minimum or maximum value in milliseconds (lower time is better). Interpretation: Lower reaction times signify better outcomes, as they reflect faster muscle response to visual stimuli.
Grip Strength (Measured Using Jamar Electronic Dynamometer)
Time frame: immediately after the intervention
Hand performance was assessed based on grip strength using a Takei Handheld Dynamometer (Takei Scientific Instruments Co., Tokyo, Japan). Participants were seated with elbows flexed at 90 degrees and forearms in a neutral position, and were instructed to squeeze the dynamometer with maximum force for 3-5 seconds, with the palm facing upwards. Each hand was tested three times with a 20-second rest between trials, and the highest value was recorded. This protocol ensures standardized and consistent results, with measurements documented in kilograms (kg) to provide reliable grip strength assessment. Scale Range: The dynamometer measures from 0 to 90 kg. Interpretation: Higher scores reflect stronger grip strength, which is indicative of better hand function.
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 18 May 2026.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Stroke
Not yet recruiting
Closed-Loop SCS-BCI for Post-Stroke Hemiplegia
Stroke, Motor Dysfunction
Active, not recruiting
Transferring Speed of Processing Gains to Everyday Cognitive Tasks After Stroke
Stroke, Cognitive Dysfunction
Not yet recruitingObservational study
A Speaking-Valve-Based Decannulation Protocol for Tracheostomized Stroke Patients
Stroke Patients, Tracheostomy
RecruitingPhase 4
Blood Pressure Reduction to Limit the Evolution of Vascular Brain Lesions in Elderly Individuals
Cerebrovascular Disorders
Not yet recruiting
Effect of Early Tendon Vibrations on Upper Limb Motor Recovery After a Stroke
Acute Stroke, Upper Limb Motor Deficit
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.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Sensory and Motor Exercise Group, The Sensory Exercise Group and The Motor Exercise Group in people with Stroke and Hand, run by Atlas University at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye).
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 3 inclusion and 7 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 18 May 2026. 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 Turkey (Türkiye). 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?
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?
Moberg Pick-up Test (MPUT) (time frame: immediately after the intervention). The study lists 3 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 18 May 2026.