Deans' stroke musings: Robot-Assisted Training as Self-Training for Upper-Limb Hemiplegia in Chronic Stroke: A Randomized Controlled Trial

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, March 30, 2022

Robot-Assisted Training as Self-Training for Upper-Limb Hemiplegia in Chronic Stroke: A Randomized Controlled Trial

So not that useful.

Robot-Assisted Training as Self-Training for Upper-Limb Hemiplegia in Chronic Stroke: A Randomized Controlled Trial

and

Originally published29 Mar 2022https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.121.037260Stroke. 2022;0:10.1161/STROKEAHA.121.037260

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

This study aimed to examine whether robotic self-training improved upper-extremity function versus conventional self-training in mild-to-moderate hemiplegic chronic stroke patients.

METHODS:

Study design was a multi-center, prospective, randomized, parallel-group study comparing three therapist-guided interventions (1-hour sessions, 3×/wk, 10 weeks). We identified 161 prospective patients with chronic, poststroke, upper-limb hemiplegia treated at participating rehabilitation centers. Patients were enrolled between November 29, 2016, and November 12, 2018 in Japan. A blinded web-based allocation system was used to randomly assign 129 qualifying patients into 3 groups: (1) conventional self-training plus conventional therapy (control, N=42); (2) robotic self-training (ReoGo-J) plus conventional therapy (robotic therapy [RT], N=44); or (3) robotic self-training plus constraint-induced movement therapy (N=43). Primary outcome: Fugl-Meyer Assessment for upper-extremity. Secondary outcomes: Motor Activity Log-14 amount of use and quality of movement; Fugl-Meyer Assessment shoulder/elbow/forearm, wrist, finger, and coordination scores; Action Research Arm Test Score; Motricity Index; Modified Ashworth Scale; shoulder, elbow, forearm, wrist, and finger range of motion; and Stroke Impact Scale (the assessors were blinded). Safety outcomes were adverse events.

RESULTS:

Safety was assessed in 127 patients. An intention-to-treat full analysis set (N=121), and a per-protocol set (N=115) of patients who attended 80% of sessions were assessed. One severe adverse event was recorded, unrelated to the robotic device. No significant differences in Fugl-Meyer Assessment for upper-extremity scores were observed between groups (RT versus control: −1.04 [95% CI, −2.79 to 0.71], P=0.40; RT versus movement therapy: −0.33 [95% CI, −2.02 to 1.36], P=0.90). The RT in the per-protocol set improved significantly in the Fugl-Meyer Assessment for upper-extremity shoulder/elbow/forearm score (RT versus control: −1.46 [95% CI, −2.63 to −0.29]; P=0.037).

CONCLUSIONS:

Robotic self-training did not improve upper-limb function versus usual self-training, but may be effective combined with conventional therapy in some populations (per-protocol set).