Deans' stroke musings: Comparison of Upper Limb Motor Therapy Outcomes in Post-Stroke Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial of Therapist-Led Versus Robot-Assisted Rehabilitation

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.

Tuesday, March 3, 2026

Comparison of Upper Limb Motor Therapy Outcomes in Post-Stroke Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial of Therapist-Led Versus Robot-Assisted Rehabilitation

So both were complete fucking failures at 100% recovery! And you have EXACT PLANS TO ADDRESS THAT PROBLEM?

Oh NO, you HAVE NOTHING AND WILL DO NOTHING!

Comparison of Upper Limb Motor Therapy Outcomes in Post-Stroke Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial of Therapist-Led Versus Robot-Assisted Rehabilitation

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8795941/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

High-dose, task-specific upper limb training is essential for post-stroke motor recovery. EMG-triggered robot-assisted therapy enables intention-driven, high-repetition practice; however, evidence from randomized trials directly comparing this approach with dose-matched conventional rehabilitation remains limited. This single-blind randomized controlled trial compared short-term outcomes of EMG-triggered robot-assisted upper limb training using the Luna EMG system with standardized therapist-led therapy in patients after stroke.

Fifty-eight patients in the early post-stroke phase were randomly assigned to robot-assisted therapy (n = 29) or therapist-assisted therapy (n = 29). Both groups received identical upper limb training with respect to duration, intensity, frequency, and number of repetitions over six weeks within the same inpatient rehabilitation program. Outcomes were assessed at baseline, weeks three and six, and at three-week follow-up using the Fugl–Meyer Assessment for Upper Extremity, Box and Block Test, Modified Ashworth Scale, Numerical Rating Scale, and EQ-5D-5L.

Both groups showed significant within-group improvements(NOT GOOD ENOUGH! Survivors want full recovery and YOU FAILED THEM!) in motor function, pain, and quality of life over time. When therapy dose is strictly controlled, no statistically significant between-group differences were observed. A single between-group difference was observed in the EQ-5D-5L domain of usual activities at follow-up, favoring the robot-assisted group.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT07002463. Registered May 30, 2025 (retrospectively registered)