Sequencing bilateral robot-assisted arm therapy and constraint-induced therapy improves reach to press and trunk kinematics in patients with stroke

Then write this up as a stroke protocol AND DELIVER IT to all 10 million yearly stroke survivors and since this is chronic, those in the past, maybe 40-50 million. 

This printed research article is only the start of your job since we have fucking failures of stroke associations you can't dump the followup on them.

It has only been 4 years, WHERE THE FUCK IS THE PROTOCOL LOCATED? Survivors need to know. 

Sequencing bilateral robot-assisted arm therapy and constraint-induced therapy improves reach to press and trunk kinematics in patients with stroke

Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
 (2016) 13:31
DOI 10.1186/s12984-016-0138-5

Yu-wei Hsieh 1, 

Rong-jiuan Liing 2, 

Keh-chung Lin 2,3, 

Ching-yi Wu 1*, 

Tsan-hon Liou 4, 

Jui-chi Lin 4,
and Jen-wen Hung 5

Abstract

Background:
 The combination of robot-assisted therapy (RT) and a modified form of constraint-induced therapy(mCIT) shows promise for improving motor function of patients with stroke. However, whether the changes of motor control strategies are concomitant with the improvements in motor function after combination of RT andmCIT (RT + mCIT) is unclear. This study investigated the effects of the sequential combination of RT + mCIT compared with RT alone on the strategies of motor control measured by kinematic analysis and on motor function and daily performance measured by clinical scales.
Methods:
 The study enrolled 34 patients with chronic stroke. The data were derived from part of a single-blinded randomized controlled trial. Participants in the RT + mCIT and RT groups received 20 therapy sessions (90 to105 min/day, 5 days for 4 weeks). Patients in the RT + mCIT group received 10 RT sessions for first 2 weeks and 10mCIT sessions for the next 2 weeks. The Bi-Manu-Track was used in RT sessions to provide bilateral practice of wrist and forearm movements. The primary outcome was kinematic variables in a task of reaching to press a desk bell.Secondary outcomes included scores on the Wolf Motor Function Test, Functional Independence Measure, and Nottingham Extended Activities of Daily Living. All outcome measures were administered before and after intervention.
Results:
 RT + mCIT and RT demonstrated different benefits on motor control strategies. RT + mCIT uniquely improved motor control strategies by reducing shoulder abduction, increasing elbow extension, and decreasing trunk compensatory movement during the reaching task. Motor function and quality of the affected limb was improved, and patients achieved greater independence in instrumental activities of daily living. Force generation at movement initiation was improved in the patients who received RT.
Conclusion:
 A combination of RT and mCIT could be an effective approach to improve stroke rehabilitation outcomes, achieving better motor control strategies, motor function, and functional independence of instrumental activities of daily living.
Trial registration:
 ClinicalTrials.gov. NCT01727648

Comparative assessment of two robot-assisted therapies for the upper extremity in people with chronic stroke

Useless because no protocol was created and had no objective starting point. So it is not repeatable. We don't need incredibly lazy words like 'might'. Survivors want definitive results. Do this, you get this result. This is so fucking simple. Who is going to inform researchers that that is the expected result of all stroke rehab research?

Comparative assessment of two robot-assisted therapies for the upper extremity in people with chronic stroke

 American Journal of Occupational Therapy (AJOT) , Volume 73(1) , Pgs. 7301205010.

NARIC Accession Number: J80499.  What's this?
ISSN: 0272-9490.
Author(s): Hung, Chung-shan; Hsieh, Yu-wei; Wu, Ching-yi; Lin, Keh-chung; Lin, Jui-chi; Yeh, Li-min; Yin, Hsin-pei.
Publication Year: 2019.
Number of Pages: 9.
Abstract: Study investigated the effects of two robot-assisted therapies (RT) on motor and daily function in people with chronic stroke using the Bi-Manu-Track (BMT) and InMotion 3.0 (IMT) robots compared with control treatment (CT). Thirty participants were randomized to the BMT, IMT, or CT group. All participants in the three groups received interventions of 90–100 minutes per day, 5 days a week, for 4 weeks. The intervention began with 5 minutes of muscle tone normalization as needed. The BMT and IMT groups received 70–75 minutes of RT. After the RT, functional-based activities were practiced for 20 minutes. The following outcome measures were administered before and immediately after the intervention by the same assessor for each participant: Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA), Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS), Motor Activity Log (MAL), and Medical Research Council (MRC) scale. The IMT group improved more in FMA and proximal MAS scores than the BMT group and the CT group. The IMT and BMT groups showed clinically relevant improvements after treatment on the MRC rather than the MAL. The results indicate that the IMT might improve motor function. The IMT and BMT groups showed similar benefits for muscle power but limited improvements in self-perceived use of the affected arm.
Descriptor Terms: BODY MOVEMENT, DAILY LIVING, LIMBS, MOTOR SKILLS, OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY, REHABILITATION TECHNOLOGY, ROBOTICS, STROKE.


Can this document be ordered through NARIC's document delivery service*?: Y.

Citation: Hung, Chung-shan, Hsieh, Yu-wei, Wu, Ching-yi, Lin, Keh-chung, Lin, Jui-chi, Yeh, Li-min, Yin, Hsin-pei. (2019). Comparative assessment of two robot-assisted therapies for the upper extremity in people with chronic stroke.  American Journal of Occupational Therapy (AJOT) , 73(1), Pgs. 7301205010. Retrieved 4/23/2019, from REHABDATA database.