Changing stroke rehab and research worldwide now.Time is Brain! trillions and trillions of neurons that DIE each day because there are NO effective hyperacute therapies besides tPA(only 12% effective). I have 523 posts on hyperacute therapy, enough for researchers to spend decades proving them out. These are my personal ideas and blog on stroke rehabilitation and stroke research. Do not attempt any of these without checking with your medical provider. Unless you join me in agitating, when you need these therapies they won't be there.

What this blog is for:

My blog is not to help survivors recover, it is to have the 10 million yearly stroke survivors light fires underneath their doctors, stroke hospitals and stroke researchers to get stroke solved. 100% recovery. The stroke medical world is completely failing at that goal, they don't even have it as a goal. Shortly after getting out of the hospital and getting NO information on the process or protocols of stroke rehabilitation and recovery I started searching on the internet and found that no other survivor received useful information. This is an attempt to cover all stroke rehabilitation information that should be readily available to survivors so they can talk with informed knowledge to their medical staff. It lays out what needs to be done to get stroke survivors closer to 100% recovery. It's quite disgusting that this information is not available from every stroke association and doctors group.

Wednesday, May 22, 2019

Robot assisted training for the upper limb after stroke (RATULS): a multicentre randomised controlled trial

I bet this didn't show results because not enough repetitions were done.  They mention intensity of training, 20 hours needed from a Cochrane review but don't assign failure to what they even mention. Bad analysis and research, their mentors and senior researchers should have caught that.

Robot assisted training for the upper limb after stroke (RATULS): a multicentre randomised controlled trial

Open AccessPublished:May 22, 2019DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(19)31055-4

Summary

Background

Loss of arm function is a common problem after stroke. Robot-assisted training might improve arm function and activities of daily living. We compared the clinical effectiveness of robot-assisted training using the MIT-Manus robotic gym with an enhanced upper limb therapy (EULT) programme based on repetitive functional task practice and with usual care.

Methods

RATULS was a pragmatic, multicentre, randomised controlled trial done at four UK centres. Stroke patients aged at least 18 years with moderate or severe upper limb functional limitation, between 1 week and 5 years after their first stroke, were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive robot-assisted training, EULT, or usual care. Robot-assisted training and EULT were provided for 45 min, three times per week for 12 weeks. Randomisation was internet-based using permuted block sequences. Treatment allocation was masked from outcome assessors but not from participants or therapists. The primary outcome was upper limb function success (defined using the Action Research Arm Test [ARAT]) at 3 months. Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. This study is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN69371850.

Findings

Between April 14, 2014, and April 30, 2018, 770 participants were enrolled and randomly assigned to either robot-assisted training (n=257), EULT (n=259), or usual care (n=254). The primary outcome of ARAT success was achieved by 103 (44%) of 232 patients in the robot-assisted training group, 118 (50%) of 234 in the EULT group, and 85 (42%) of 203 in the usual care group. Compared with usual care, robot-assisted training (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1·17 [98·3% CI 0·70–1·96]) and EULT (aOR 1·51 [0·90–2·51]) did not improve upper limb function; the effects of robot-assisted training did not differ from EULT (aOR 0·78 [0·48–1·27]). More participants in the robot-assisted training group (39 [15%] of 257) and EULT group (33 [13%] of 259) had serious adverse events than in the usual care group (20 [8%] of 254), but none were attributable to the intervention.

Interpretation

Robot-assisted training and EULT did not improve upper limb function after stroke compared with usual care for patients with moderate or severe upper limb functional limitation. These results do not support the use of robot-assisted training as provided in this trial in routine clinical practice.

Funding

National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme.

Introduction

Upper limb problems commonly occur after a stroke, comprising loss of movement, coordination, sensation, and dexterity, which lead to difficulties with activities of daily living (ADL) such as washing and dressing. About 80% of people with acute stroke have upper limb motor impairment, and of those with reduced arm function early after stroke, 50% still have problems after 4 years.
The strongest predictor of recovery is severity of initial neurological deficit; patients with severe initial upper limb impairment are unlikely to recover arm function, with clear impact upon their quality of life. Patients report that loss of arm function is one of the most distressing long-term consequences of stroke. Improving upper limb function has been identified as a top ten research priority by stroke survivors, carers, and clinicians.
How to optimise stroke patients' upper limb recovery is unclear. Systematic reviews of therapy interventions suggest that patients benefit from therapy programmes in which they practise tasks directly rather than from interventions that focus on impairments.
Intensity of therapy is also important; a Cochrane overview
of systematic reviews found moderate quality Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations evidence that arm function after a stroke can be improved by the provision of at least 20 h of additional repetitive task training.
Robot-assisted arm training has shown promise for improving ADL, arm function, and arm muscle strength after stroke.
However, studies vary in patient characteristics, device used, duration and amount of training, control group, and outcome measures used. The benefits of robot-assisted arm training over conventional therapy of the same frequency and duration have not been shown

No comments:

Post a Comment