Useless without a protocol written up. Why are you even doing stroke research if you don't actually help survivors? Your mentors and senior researchers should be fired for not setting out correct goals for your research.
Abstract
This
study aims to analyse the long-term effects (6 months follow-up) of
upper limb Robot-assisted Therapy (RT) compared to a Traditional
physical Therapy (TT), in subacute stroke patients. Although the
literature on upper-limb rehabilitation with robots shows increasing
evidence of its effectiveness in stroke survivors, how long the
re-learned motor abilities could be maintained over time is still
understudied. A randomized controlled follow-up study was conducted on
48 subacute stroke patients who performed the upper-limb therapy using a
planar end-effector robotic system (Experimental Group-EG) or TT
(Control Group-CG). The clinical assessments were collected at T0
(baseline), T1 (end of treatment) and T2 (6 months follow-up): Upper
Limb part of Fugl-Meyer assessment (FM-UL), total passive Range Of
Motion (pROM), Modified Ashworth Scale Shoulder (MAS-S) and Elbow
(MAS-E). At T1, the intra-group analysis showed significant gain of
FM-UL in both EG and CG, while significant improvement in MAS-S, MAS-E,
and pROM were found in the EG only. At T2, significant increase in MAS-S
were revealed only in the CG. In FM-UL, pROM and MAS-E the improvements
obtained at the end of treatment seem to be maintained at 6 months
follow-up in both groups. The inter-groups analysis of FM-UL values at
T1 and T2 demonstrated significant differences in favour of EG. In
conclusion, upper limb Robot-assisted Therapy may lead a greater
reduction of motor impairment in subacute stroke patients compared to
Traditional Therapy. The gains observed at the end of treatment
persisted over time. No serious adverse event related to the study
occurred.
Keywords
Robot-assisted Therapy
Follow-up
Rehabilitation
Stroke
Upper Limb
© 2019 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
No comments:
Post a Comment