Effects of upper limb robot-assisted therapy on motor recovery in subacute stroke patients

So this is helpful. Whom is going to contact all the PMR doctors and neurologists to make sure this gets included in all stroke protocols within the next month? ASA/NSA are you up to doing some actual work instead of just putting out lazy press releases? That means contacting all of these persons directly. It also means documenting the exact protocols being used so every survivor can see them and make sure their doctor and therapist is using the correct one.

Effects of upper limb robot-assisted therapy on motor recovery in subacute stroke patients

Patrizio Sale^1*, Marco Franceschini¹, Stefano Mazzoleni²³, Enzo Palma¹, Maurizio Agosti⁴ and Federico Posteraro³⁵

• * Corresponding author: Patrizio Sale patrizio.sale@gmail.com

Author Affiliations

For all author emails, please log on.

Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation 2014, 11:104  doi:10.1186/1743-0003-11-104
Published: 19 June 2014

Abstract

Background and purpose

There is little evidence available on the use of robot-assisted therapy in subacute stroke patients. A randomized controlled trial was carried out to evaluate the short-time efficacy of intensive robot-assisted therapy compared to usual physical therapy performed in the early phase after stroke onset.

Methods

Fifty-three subacute stroke patients at their first-ever stroke were enrolled 30 ± 7 days after the acute event and randomized into two groups, both exposed to standard therapy. Additional 30 sessions of robot-assisted therapy were provided to the Experimental Group. Additional 30 sessions of usual therapy were provided to the Control Group.

The following impairment evaluations were performed at the beginning (T0), after 15 sessions (T1), and at the end of the treatment (T2): Fugl-Meyer Assessment Scale (FM), Modified Ashworth Scale-Shoulder (MAS-S), Modified Ashworth Scale-Elbow (MAS-E), Total Passive Range of Motion-Shoulder/Elbow (pROM), and Motricity Index (MI).

Results

Evidence of significant improvements in MAS-S (p = 0.004), MAS-E (p = 0.018) and pROM (p < 0.0001) was found in the Experimental Group. Significant improvement was demonstrated in both Experimental and Control Group in FM (EG: p < 0.0001, CG: p < 0.0001) and MI (EG: p < 0.0001, CG: p < 0.0001), with an higher improvement in the Experimental Group.

Conclusions

Robot-assisted upper limb rehabilitation treatment can contribute to increasing motor recovery in subacute stroke patients. Focusing on the early phase of stroke recovery has a high potential impact in clinical practice.