摘要
Background/Aim: Task-specific repetitive training, a usual care in occupational therapy practice, and robotic-aided rehabilitation with bilateral practice are used to improve upper limb motor and task performance. The difference in effects of two strategies requires exploration. This study compared the impact of robotic-assisted therapy with bilateral practice (RTBP) and usual task-specific training facilitated by therapists on task and motor performance for stroke survivors. Methods: Forty-three community-dwelling stroke survivors (20 males; 23 females; 53.3 ± 13.1 years; post-stroke duration 14.2 ± 10.9 months) were randomised into RTBP and usual care. All participants received a 10-minute per-protocol sensorimotor stimulation session prior to interventions as part of usual care. Primary outcome was different in the amount of use (AOU) and quality of movement (QOM) on the Motor Activity Log (MAL) scale at endpoint. Secondary outcomes were AOU and QOM scores at follow-up, and pre-post and follow-up score differences on the Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA) and surface electromyography (sEMG). Friedman and Mann–Whitney U tests were used to calculate difference. Results: There were no baseline differences between groups. Both conditions demonstrated significant within-group improvements in AOU-MAL and FMA scores following treatment (P < 0.05) and improvements in FMA scores at follow-up (P < 0.05). The training-induced improvement in AOU (30.0%) following treatment was greater than the minimal detectable change (16.8%) in the RTBP group. RTBP demonstrated better outcomes in FMA wrist score (P = 0.003) and sEMG of wrist extensor (P = 0.043) following treatment and in AOU (P < 0.001), FMA total score (P = 0.006), FMA wrist score (P < 0.001) and sEMG of wrist extensor (P = 0.017) at follow-up compared to the control group. Control group boost more beneficial effects on FMA hand score (P = 0.049) following treatment. Conclusions: RTBP demonstrated superior upper limb motor and task performance outcomes compared to therapists-facilitated task training when both were preceded by a 10-minute sensorimotor stimulation session. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03847103.
| 原文 | English |
|---|---|
| 頁（從 - 到） | 637-647 |
| 頁數 | 11 |
| 期刊 | Australian Occupational Therapy Journal |
| 卷 | 66 |
| 發行號 | 5 |
| DOIs | |
| 出版狀態 | Published - 2019 十月 1 |
指紋
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Occupational Therapy
引用此文
}
Robotic-assisted therapy with bilateral practice improves task and motor performance in the upper extremities of chronic stroke patients : A randomised controlled trial. / Hsu, Hsiu Yun; Chiu, Haw Yen; Kuan, Ta Shen; Tsai, Ching Liang; Su, Fong Chin; Kuo, Li Chieh.
於: Australian Occupational Therapy Journal, 卷 66, 編號 5, 01.10.2019, p. 637-647.研究成果: Article
TY - JOUR
T1 - Robotic-assisted therapy with bilateral practice improves task and motor performance in the upper extremities of chronic stroke patients
T2 - A randomised controlled trial
AU - Hsu, Hsiu Yun
AU - Chiu, Haw Yen
AU - Kuan, Ta Shen
AU - Tsai, Ching Liang
AU - Su, Fong Chin
AU - Kuo, Li Chieh
PY - 2019/10/1
Y1 - 2019/10/1
N2 - Background/Aim: Task-specific repetitive training, a usual care in occupational therapy practice, and robotic-aided rehabilitation with bilateral practice are used to improve upper limb motor and task performance. The difference in effects of two strategies requires exploration. This study compared the impact of robotic-assisted therapy with bilateral practice (RTBP) and usual task-specific training facilitated by therapists on task and motor performance for stroke survivors. Methods: Forty-three community-dwelling stroke survivors (20 males; 23 females; 53.3 ± 13.1 years; post-stroke duration 14.2 ± 10.9 months) were randomised into RTBP and usual care. All participants received a 10-minute per-protocol sensorimotor stimulation session prior to interventions as part of usual care. Primary outcome was different in the amount of use (AOU) and quality of movement (QOM) on the Motor Activity Log (MAL) scale at endpoint. Secondary outcomes were AOU and QOM scores at follow-up, and pre-post and follow-up score differences on the Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA) and surface electromyography (sEMG). Friedman and Mann–Whitney U tests were used to calculate difference. Results: There were no baseline differences between groups. Both conditions demonstrated significant within-group improvements in AOU-MAL and FMA scores following treatment (P < 0.05) and improvements in FMA scores at follow-up (P < 0.05). The training-induced improvement in AOU (30.0%) following treatment was greater than the minimal detectable change (16.8%) in the RTBP group. RTBP demonstrated better outcomes in FMA wrist score (P = 0.003) and sEMG of wrist extensor (P = 0.043) following treatment and in AOU (P < 0.001), FMA total score (P = 0.006), FMA wrist score (P < 0.001) and sEMG of wrist extensor (P = 0.017) at follow-up compared to the control group. Control group boost more beneficial effects on FMA hand score (P = 0.049) following treatment. Conclusions: RTBP demonstrated superior upper limb motor and task performance outcomes compared to therapists-facilitated task training when both were preceded by a 10-minute sensorimotor stimulation session. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03847103.
AB - Background/Aim: Task-specific repetitive training, a usual care in occupational therapy practice, and robotic-aided rehabilitation with bilateral practice are used to improve upper limb motor and task performance. The difference in effects of two strategies requires exploration. This study compared the impact of robotic-assisted therapy with bilateral practice (RTBP) and usual task-specific training facilitated by therapists on task and motor performance for stroke survivors. Methods: Forty-three community-dwelling stroke survivors (20 males; 23 females; 53.3 ± 13.1 years; post-stroke duration 14.2 ± 10.9 months) were randomised into RTBP and usual care. All participants received a 10-minute per-protocol sensorimotor stimulation session prior to interventions as part of usual care. Primary outcome was different in the amount of use (AOU) and quality of movement (QOM) on the Motor Activity Log (MAL) scale at endpoint. Secondary outcomes were AOU and QOM scores at follow-up, and pre-post and follow-up score differences on the Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA) and surface electromyography (sEMG). Friedman and Mann–Whitney U tests were used to calculate difference. Results: There were no baseline differences between groups. Both conditions demonstrated significant within-group improvements in AOU-MAL and FMA scores following treatment (P < 0.05) and improvements in FMA scores at follow-up (P < 0.05). The training-induced improvement in AOU (30.0%) following treatment was greater than the minimal detectable change (16.8%) in the RTBP group. RTBP demonstrated better outcomes in FMA wrist score (P = 0.003) and sEMG of wrist extensor (P = 0.043) following treatment and in AOU (P < 0.001), FMA total score (P = 0.006), FMA wrist score (P < 0.001) and sEMG of wrist extensor (P = 0.017) at follow-up compared to the control group. Control group boost more beneficial effects on FMA hand score (P = 0.049) following treatment. Conclusions: RTBP demonstrated superior upper limb motor and task performance outcomes compared to therapists-facilitated task training when both were preceded by a 10-minute sensorimotor stimulation session. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03847103.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85069913087&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85069913087&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/1440-1630.12602
DO - 10.1111/1440-1630.12602
M3 - Article
C2 - 31317553
AN - SCOPUS:85069913087
VL - 66
SP - 637
EP - 647
JO - Australian Occupational Therapy Journal
JF - Australian Occupational Therapy Journal
SN - 0045-0766
IS - 5
ER -