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.

Showing posts with label FMA-UE. Show all posts
Showing posts with label FMA-UE. Show all posts

Friday, September 25, 2026

Surface EMG-based classification and prediction of Fugl-Meyer upper extremity scores in subacute stroke

 Nothing here is of any use to recovery!  Fugl-Meyer has no objectivity at all, so you can't map recovery protocols to your scores!

'Assessments' like Fugl-Meyer NEVER GET ANYONE RECOVERED! I'd have you all fired for incompetency in not solving stroke!

Surface EMG-based classification and prediction of Fugl-Meyer upper extremity scores in subacute stroke

    We’re sharing this article early to provide faster access to peer-reviewed, accepted research. It is citable and carries a permanent DOI. This version is subject to further edits and will be replaced automatically by the final Version of Record. All legal disclaimers apply.

    Abstract

    Background

    Stroke is a leading cause of long-term disability worldwide, and with rising incidence and a global shortage of rehabilitation professionals, there is a growing need for scalable methods to assess motor impairment. Surface electromyography (sEMG) has emerged as a promising modality for capturing motor function. Despite its potential, sEMG remains underused in clinical practice and has been predominantly studied in chronic stroke populations, leaving the subacute phase largely unexplored. Its ability to complement standardized assessments is not yet well established.

    Methods

    Bilateral sEMG was recorded from 23 subacute stroke participants performing four standardized wrist and hand tasks. Task-level features were extracted to train machine learning models to classify the presence of an impairment (affected or less-affected) and the level of impairment, as measured by the Upper Extremity Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA-UE) and its wrist and hand subsections (FMA-WH). Models were evaluated using leave-one-subject-out cross-validation (LOSO-CV). Benchmark regression models used therapist-rated subscores as inputs and paired t-tests compared their absolute errors against those of the sEMG-based models. Model interpretability was examined using SHapley Additive exPlanations values (SHAP) to identify sEMG features contributing most strongly to predicted impairment levels.

    Results

    For impairment classification, Wrist Extension yielded the highest performance in classifying impairment (Accuracy 0.87 ± 0.16; Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic [AUC-ROC] 0.96 ± 0.07). An evaluation of all binary and triple task combinations revealed that Wrist Extension combined with Pincer Grasp achieved the best overall classification (Accuracy 0.92 ± 0.12; AUC-ROC 0.99 ± 0.03). For impairment level estimation, the sEMG-based predictions reached a Root Mean Squared Error (RMSE) of 3.12 for FMA-WH and 6.68 for FMA-UE. SHAP analysis with the sEMG-based model revealed that higher extensor activation strongly drove higher predicted scores.

    Conclusions

    Using sEMG signals obtained from a consumer-grade armband during hand and wrist tasks enabled estimation of partial and full FMA-UE scores, achieving prediction errors below the minimally clinically important difference (MCID) of the full FMA-UE. Furthermore, a two-task protocol (Wrist Extension + Pincer Grasp) achieved the highest classification accuracy, demonstrating that clinical assessment burden could be reduced without compromising performance. This highlights the potential for scalable and portable assessment solutions, though larger longitudinal validation is required.

    Wednesday, August 26, 2026

    Combined intermittent and continuous theta-burst stimulation of the primary motor cortices for upper-extremity motor recovery and cortical excitability in ischemic stroke:a randomized controlled trial

     Your incompetent? hospital can't even figure out how to deliver music therapy; they will never do anything this complicated! Unless YOU reconstitute the hospital and hire competent staff!

    Combined intermittent and continuous theta-burst stimulation of the primary motor cortices for upper-extremity motor recovery and cortical excitability in ischemic stroke:a randomized controlled trial

      We’re sharing this article early to provide faster access to peer-reviewed, accepted research. It is citable and carries a permanent DOI. This version is subject to further edits and will be replaced automatically by the final Version of Record. All legal disclaimers apply.

      Abstract

      Background

      Ischemic stroke remains a leading global cause of persistent motor disability, with upper-extremity paresis severely impairing functional independence in most survivors. Intermittent theta-burst stimulation (iTBS) and continuous theta-burst stimulation (cTBS) exert bidirectional neuromodulatory effects on cortical excitability, yet the therapeutic efficacy and neurophysiological mechanisms of combined bilateral TBS targeting primary motor cortices (M1) remain poorly elucidated for subacute stroke rehabilitation.

      Objective

      This randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled pilot trial evaluated the safety, clinical efficacy, and neurophysiological correlates of ipsilesional iTBS combined with contralesional cTBS (i-cTBS) for upper-extremity motor recovery in subacute ischemic stroke, with a hierarchical statistical framework to distinguish confirmatory secondary endpoints from exploratory neurophysiological outcomes.

      Methods

      Sixty-four patients with first-ever unilateral ischemic stroke (within 3 weeks post-onset) and upper-extremity motor impairment were randomized 1:1 to real i-cTBS (n = 32) or sham stimulation (n = 32). All participants received 10 daily sessions (5 sessions per week over 2 consecutive weeks) immediately followed by standardized task-oriented upper-extremity physiotherapy. The primary outcome was total Fugl-Meyer Assessment of Upper Extremity (FMA-UE) score. Tremor, dysmetria, and movement speed subscores served as confirmatory secondary endpoints with Bonferroni correction; motor-evoked potential (MEP) amplitude and resting motor threshold were exploratory neurophysiological measures. Group × time interactions were analyzed using a mixed-design analysis of variance.

      Results

      After the 2-week intervention, a significant group × time interaction was detected for total FMA-UE scores, with greater improvements in the real i-cTBS group (p < 0.001, = 0.365). Tremor and dysmetria subscores showed pronounced benefits, while movement speed showed no between-group difference. MEP amplitude of the ipsilesional M1 was selectively potentiated only in the real group (p < 0.001), and its gains were moderately correlated with motor functional improvement. No serious adverse events related to the intervention were documented.

      Conclusion

      i-cTBS is a safe, well-tolerated intervention that delivers meaningful(Is not 100% recovery, so still a failure per the survivor!) upper-extremity motor recovery in subacute ischemic stroke, with particular amelioration of tremor and dysmetria. The therapeutic effects are likely mediated by bidirectional normalization of interhemispheric excitability gradients and enhanced ipsilesional corticospinal plasticity, supporting its translational potential as an adjuvant therapy for early post-stroke neurorehabilitation.

      Wednesday, July 9, 2025

      Measuring severe stroke: a scoping review of RCTs

      None of these tools are objective. No one is determining the exact location and number of neurons(both gray and white matter) affected. 

      I consider the NIHSS subjective stroke scale as worthless.

      The first thing needed is an OBJECTIVE DAMAGE DIAGNOSIS. The National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale(NIHSS) is not objective.With no objective damage diagnosis you can't even do any decent research because you don't have a valid starting point for comparison purposes. Do you KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT RESEARCH AT ALL?

      Fugl-Meyer Assessment-Upper Extremity may be the gold standard in assessing something, but it is completely subjective so completely useless in validating how well interventions work. With no objective starting point you can't make any research on that repeatable. 

      The 20 tasks in the UEFI include: 20 questions on a 5- point rating scale

      Measuring severe stroke: a scoping review of RCTs


      • 1Department of Physiotherapy, Pain and Exercise Research Luebeck (P.E.R.L.), Institute of Health Sciences, Universität zu Lübeck, Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23562 Lübeck, Germany, Lübeck, Germany
      • 2Institute of Health and Nursing Sciences, Medical Faculty of Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, University Medicine Halle, Magdeburger Straße 8, 06112 Halle (Saale), Germany, Halle (Saale), Germany
      • 3Department of Orthopedic and Trauma Surgery, Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg, Ernst-Grube-Str. 40, 06120 Halle (Saale), Germany, Halle (Saale), Germany

      The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

        Background: Stroke severity affects length of hospital stay and functional recovery in rehabilitation. Therefore, establishing baseline data of stroke severity is a crucial step. In 2017, neurorehabilitation researchers met at the Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Roundtable (SRRR) to build a consensus on new standards for stroke recovery research. Core outcomes for measurement in stroke trials resulted in the recommendation that severe stroke should be assessed using the NIHSS. This scoping review aims to provide an overview of the variety of measurements used in clinical research to assess severe stroke.Methods: RCTs and CCTs were identified by searching PubMed, CENTRAL, SSCI, and ICTRP, covering articles published between January 2018 and September 2024. Peer-reviewed articles in English focusing on rehabilitative interventions and patients aged 18 years or older who have been classified with a severe stroke. The articles included were analyzed according to used measurements and cut-off scores.The initial search yielded 1004 publications, of which 35 (3.6 %) studies were deemed eligible. In total, eleven different measures were used to assess severe stroke. Most studies used the NIHSS (n=14), followed by mRS (n=6), the FMA upper extremity (n=4), the original FMA (n=4) and the (modified) BI (n=3). Seven different cut-off scores for the NIHSS were identified, with the scale being most frequently used in clinical settings. Conclusions: This review indicates substantial variability in measurements and a diverse range of cutoff scores. Consequently, comparability of patients' baseline stroke severity across studies is limited. Given the fact that the NIHSS is only partially used, future efforts should focus on barriers and challenges using the NIHSS.

        Keywords: stroke severity, Outcome measure, Cut-off scores, neurological rehabilitation, stroke phase, NIHSS

        Received: 19 May 2025; Accepted: 07 Jul 2025.

        Copyright: © 2025 Roesner, Brodowski and Strutz. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

        * Correspondence: Nicole Strutz, Department of Orthopedic and Trauma Surgery, Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg, Ernst-Grube-Str. 40, 06120 Halle (Saale), Germany, Halle (Saale), Germany

        Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

        Wednesday, August 2, 2023

        Sensitivity to Change and Responsiveness of the Upper Extremity Fugl-Meyer Assessment in Individuals With Moderate to Severe Acute Stroke

         Fugl-Meyer Assessment-Upper Extremity may be the gold standard in assessing something, but it is completely subjective so completely useless in validating how well interventions work. With no objective starting point you can't make any research on that repeatable.

        The 20 tasks in the UEFI include: 20 questions on a 5- point rating scale

        1. Any of your usual work, housework, or school activities
        2. Your usual hobbies, recreational or sporting activities All are now impossible; running, biking, canoeing,xc skiing, hunting,fishing.
        3. Lifting a bag of groceries to waist level Impossible due to spasticity of the left hand
        4. Lifting a bag of groceries above your head Impossible due to spasticity of the left arm
        5. Grooming your hair Well, I'm bald, I can groom my hair with a wet washcloth
        6. Pushing up on your hands (eg, from bathtub or chair) Impossible due to spasticity of the left arm and hand
        7. Preparing food (eg, peeling, cutting) Impossible, can't hold anything in left hand
        8. Driving Now I'm great at this, does require a turn signal extender.
        9. Vacuuming, sweeping or raking Anything that requires two hands is impossible
        10. Dressing sitting down to put on underwear, socks, pants, shoes
        11. Doing up buttons Good fingers only
        12. Using tools or appliances Nope
        13. Opening doors Only with good hand
        14. Cleaning The vacuum has to be battery powered since keeping the cord out of the way doesn't work with affected hand
        15. Tying or lacing shoes Impossible, no usable finger movement
        16. Sleeping Difficult because the spastic left arm stays bent, gets in the way on rolling over
        17. Laundering clothes (eg, washing, ironing, folding) Washing, yes; ironing/folding; impossible
        18. Opening a jar Impossible, can't get the left hand open enough to grab any jar.
        19. Throwing a ball Impossible, would have to pry fingers open to get ball inside, then pry then open to release.
        20. Carrying a small suitcase with your affected limb Impossible

        Sensitivity to Change and Responsiveness of the Upper Extremity Fugl-Meyer Assessment in Individuals With Moderate to Severe Acute Stroke

        Abstract

        Background

        The Fugl-Meyer Assessment-Upper Extremity (FMA-UE) is a widely used outcome measure for quantifying motor impairment in stroke recovery. Meaningful change (responsiveness) in the acute to subacute phase of stroke recovery has not been determined.

        Objective

        Determine responsiveness and sensitivity to change of the FMA-UE from 1-week to 6-weeks (subacute) after stroke in individuals with moderate to severe arm impairment who received standard clinical care.

        Methods

        A total of 51 participants with resulting moderate and severe UE hemiparesis after stroke had FMA-UE assessment at baseline (within 2 weeks of stroke) and 6-weeks later. Sensitivity to change was assessed using Glass’s delta, standardized response means (SRM), standard error of measure (SEM), and minimal detectable change (MDC). Responsiveness was assessed with the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), estimated using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis with patient-reported global rating of change scales (GROC) and a provider-reported modified Rankin Scale (mRS) as anchors.

        Results

        The MCID estimates were 13, 12, and 9 anchored to the GROC Arm Weakness, GROC Recovery, and mRS. Glass’s delta and the SRM revealed large effect sizes, indicating high sensitivity to change, (∆ = 1.24, 95% CI [0.64, 1.82], SRM = 1.10). Results for the SEM and MDC were 2.46 and 6.82, respectively.

        Conclusion

        The estimated MCID for the FMA-UE for individuals with moderate to severe motor impairment from 1 to 6-weeks after stroke is 13. These estimates will provide clinical context for FMA-UE change scores by helping to identify the change in upper-extremity motor impairment that is both beyond measurement error and clinically meaningful.

        Get full access to this article