RehabilitationNCT03114046
Constraint-induced Movement Therapy to Improve Gait and Mobility of People With Chronic Stroke
A study testing Lower extremity Constraint-induced movement therapy(LE-CIMT) in people with Rehabilitation and Recovery of Function, run by University of Alabama at Birmingham at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
The purpose of this single-subject, concurrent mixed methods study is to investigate the relationship between the effect of the CIMT protocol on gait and mobility and participants' and caregivers' expectations and perceptions regarding the treatment. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 19 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Rehabilitation, Recovery of Function, Stroke
- What is being tested?
- Lower extremity Constraint-induced movement therapy(LE-CIMT)
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 8 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 1 Jun 2017to 1 Oct 2018
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 19 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- be 19 years old or older,
- have more than 6 months after stroke;
- present motor impairment on lower extremity due to stroke, but able to walk at least 25 feet using an assistive device or not, at least three times a day;
- have no previous experience with any LE CIMT protocol.
Who cannot join
- presence of uncontrolled clinical conditions;
- presence of other neurologic diseases;
- Mini-mental State Examination score <24
- inability to answer yes and no questions properly;
- score lower than 45 out of 56 on the Berg Balance Scale, and score higher than 5 on LEMAL, what indicates that they are already utilizing the paretic lower limb while performing daily activities.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
University of Alabama at Birmingham
Birmingham, Alabama, 35233
About this study
The purpose of this single-subject, concurrent mixed methods study is to investigate the relationship between the effect of the CIMT protocol on gait and mobility and participants' and caregivers' expectations and perceptions regarding the treatment. The goal of the quantitative strand is to assess changes in quality of movement and functional use of the paretic lower limb after the treatment and investigate the participants' expectations in regards the intervention using the Participant Opinion Survey (POS). The qualitative strand (participant interviews) will determine perspectives of caregiver and participant perspectives regarding protocol acceptability. Both quantitative and qualitative data will be collected and analyzed concurrently, through triangulation and complementarity rationales; both data will be equally prioritized.
Read the detailed description
About 66% of stroke survivors present gait impairment and mobility limitation. Rehabilitation techniques for people with walking and mobility disability after stroke have been broadly investigated in recent decades. However, few rehabilitation approaches have been shown to be effective in resolving these devastating problem.
Constraint-induced Movement Therapy (CIMT) presented robust evidence on increasing the amount and the quality of the paretic upper extremity (UE) functional use in daily situations of individuals with brain injuries (e.g. stroke, traumatic brain injury). The UE CIMT protocol consists of 4 components: 1) repetitive and intensive training; 2) motor training following shaping principles; 3) application of a groups of behavioral strategies called transfer package (TP), and 4) prolonged use of a restriction device on the non-paretic (or less affected) UE.
Considering the importance of repetition, intensity and specificity of the motor training to induce neuroplastic changes (3), CIMT is a potential tool to improve gait and mobility function in people with stroke. The translation of the UE protocol for Lower Extremity (LE) rehabilitation demanded some modifications for use with gait and mobility. For example, restraint of the less affected LE is not used because a different gait pattern would be induced using the restriction device. Also, the TP has been modified for LE function because of its inherent differences from UE function (e.g. both LE are more often used together and because there are more safety consequences involved with gait and mobility (e.g. falling).
In view of the significant efficacy of the UE CIMT for individuals with stroke, the extension of this approach to LE CIMT is promising, but investigation of its effect on mobility and motor function has been insufficient. The few studies that have applied a modified CIMT protocol in people with stroke did not use the full TP component. Thus, information about the effects of the complete CIMT protocol (i.e., including the TP) is greatly need. The addition of the enhanced TP in the LE protocol might have a great impact on both motor outcomes and retention of the results, as observed in previous studies about the UE approach. Considering the high intensity of the complete protocol, the added safety concerns, and the demand of involvement of the therapist, participant, and caregivers, the acceptability of the TP should be explored in order to provide a better understanding of the feasibility of this strategy.
The purpose of this single-subject, concurrent mixed methods study is to investigate the relationship between the effect of the CIMT protocol on gait and mobility and participants' and caregivers' expectations and perceptions regarding the treatment (e.g. intensity, physical and emotional demands, changes in routine). The goal of the quantitative strand is to assess changes in quality of movement and functional use of the paretic lower limb after the treatment and to investigate the participants' expectations in regards the intervention using the Participant Opinion Survey (POS). The qualitative strand (participant interviews) will determine perspectives of caregiver and participant perspectives regarding protocol acceptability. Both quantitative and qualitative data will be collected and analyzed concurrently, through triangulation and complementarity rationales; both data will be equally prioritized (4). We hypothesize that: 1) the enhanced LE CIT protocol will be effective for improving functional use of the paretic LE in people with chronic stroke; and 2) participant's and caregivers opinions are related to changes on functional use.
Aim 1: Assess the effects of the enhanced LE CIMT protocol on LE use and motor function. A single-subject ABA design with chronic stroke participants will be conducted. Individuals with different levels of severity will receive the LE CIMT, including intensive motor training and TP.
Aim 2: Richly characterize participants and caregivers acceptability of the LE CIMT protocol. A qualitative approach will be used for evaluating the acceptability of the protocol. The authors will conduct individual interviews with all participants and their caregivers or family members to determine perspectives of intervention.
Aim 3: Examine how participants and caregivers acceptability can influence changes in motor outcomes after LE CIMT. A mixed method approach will be conducted in order to investigate if there is relationship between effect on motor outcome and individuals' perceptions about the intervention.
- Conditions
- Rehabilitation, Recovery of Function, Stroke, Lower Extremity Paresis
- Being tested
- Lower extremity Constraint-induced movement therapy(LE-CIMT)
- Medical subject headings
- Stroke, Paresis
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Lower extremity Constraint-induced movement therapy(LE-CIMT)Behavioural
Both phases (A and B) will last 10 weekdays, and during baseline and treatment phases, the data will be collected on 5 different odd days. Considering the long period of data collection. During the baseline phase, no assessment will be administered on even days. The treatment will be delivered daily, along 10 weekdays, 3.5 hours per day. The motor training will be delivered during 3 hours and 30 minutes will be allocated to the administration of the TP.
Both caregivers and participants will be individually interviewed before and after treatment.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Baseline Phase | Experimental | This project will conduct a single-subject pre-experimental AB mixed methods design, considering A phase as the baseline strand. During this phase multiple assessments will be administered. This phase will last 2 consecutive weeks, with 5 visits total. Receives: Behavioral: Lower extremity Constraint-induced movement therapy(LE-CIMT) |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Lower Extremity Motor Activity Log (LE-MAL)
is a semi-structured interview, created in the UAB CIMT laboratory, that consists of asks the participant the level of assistance, how well is her/his performance, and how much confident he/she is during the execution of 14 different daily tasks (e.g walking indoors, climb stairs) (6).
Measured: The LE-MAL will be administered 10 times along 4 weeks. During the first 2 weeks (baseline phase) the stability of the functional use of the paretic lower extremity will be assessed. The last 2 weeks (intervention) the trend of change will be assessed.
Berg Balance Scale (BBS)
is a valid and reliable tool to assess balance control in 14 static and dynamic activities with people with different health conditions (7).
Measured: The BBS will be administered 10 times along 4 weeks. During the first 2 weeks (baseline phase) the stability of balance will be assessed. The last 2 weeks (intervention) the trend of change will be assessed.
10 meters walking (10MWT)
is a gait speed measurement, which is an easy and reliable assessment of locomotion (8).
Measured: The 10MWT will be administered 10 times along 4 weeks. During the first 2 weeks (baseline phase) the stability of the gait function will be assessed. The last 2 weeks (intervention) the trend of change will be assessed.
Secondary outcomes (3)
5 times sit to stand
Physical performance is commonly assessed by the 5-repetition-sit-to-stand test in a variety of populations, including stroke, elderly, and osteo-arthritis (9).
Measured: The test will be administered 10 times along 4 weeks. During the first 2 weeks (baseline phase) the stability of the lower limb function will be assessed. The last 2 weeks (intervention) the trend of change will be assessed.
6 minutes walking test (6MWT)
The 6MWT assesses the energy expenditure during walking. It is a reliable and valid instrument in a diverse group of health conditions (11).
Measured: The 6MWT will be administered 10 times along 4 weeks. During the first 2 weeks (baseline phase) the stability of the gait function will be assessed. The last 2 weeks (intervention) the trend of change will be assessed.
Life-Space Assessment (LSA).
is an instrument developed by researchers at UAB that determines the area of action (e.g., distance and place) that a person uses to perform his/her daily activities (11).
Measured: The test will be administered 10 times along 4 weeks. During the first 2 weeks (baseline phase) the stability of the mobility status will be assessed. The last 2 weeks (intervention) the trend of change will be assessed.
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted14 Apr 2017
- Study start1 Jun 2017
- Primary completion1 Sep 2018
- Study completion1 Oct 2018
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (10)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for RehabilitationStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by University of Alabama at BirminghamThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 8 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Alabama at Birmingham
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Sarah Monteiro Dos Anjos, PhD, University of Alabama at Birmingham
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03114046
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 000000
- Status last verified
- Jan 2023
- First submitted
- 4 Apr 2017
- Last updated
- 23 Jan 2023
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Jorgensen HS, Nakayama H, Raaschou HO, Vive-Larsen J, Stoier M, Olsen TS. Outcome and time course of recovery in stroke. Part II: Time course of recovery. The Copenhagen Stroke Study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1995 May;76(5):406-12. doi: 10.1016/s0003-9993(95)80568-0.
PubMed 7741609Taub E, Uswatte G, Mark VW, Morris DM, Barman J, Bowman MH, Bryson C, Delgado A, Bishop-McKay S. Method for enhancing real-world use of a more affected arm in chronic stroke: transfer package of constraint-induced movement therapy. Stroke. 2013 May;44(5):1383-8. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.111.000559. Epub 2013 Mar 21.
PubMed 23520237Lang CE, Macdonald JR, Reisman DS, Boyd L, Jacobson Kimberley T, Schindler-Ivens SM, Hornby TG, Ross SA, Scheets PL. Observation of amounts of movement practice provided during stroke rehabilitation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2009 Oct;90(10):1692-8. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2009.04.005.
PubMed 19801058Byiers BJ, Reichle J, Symons FJ. Single-subject experimental design for evidence-based practice. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2012 Nov;21(4):397-414. doi: 10.1044/1058-0360(2012/11-0036). Epub 2012 Oct 15.
PubMed 23071200Mark VW, Taub E, Uswatte G, Bashir K, Cutter GR, Bryson CC, Bishop-McKay S, Bowman MH. Constraint-induced movement therapy for the lower extremities in multiple sclerosis: case series with 4-year follow-up. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2013 Apr;94(4):753-60. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2012.09.032. Epub 2012 Oct 27.
PubMed 23111280Berg K, Wood-Dauphinee S, Williams JI. The Balance Scale: reliability assessment with elderly residents and patients with an acute stroke. Scand J Rehabil Med. 1995 Mar;27(1):27-36.
PubMed 7792547Green J, Forster A, Young J. Reliability of gait speed measured by a timed walking test in patients one year after stroke. Clin Rehabil. 2002 May;16(3):306-14. doi: 10.1191/0269215502cr495oa.
PubMed 12017517Mong Y, Teo TW, Ng SS. 5-repetition sit-to-stand test in subjects with chronic stroke: reliability and validity. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2010 Mar;91(3):407-13. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2009.10.030.
PubMed 20298832Eng JJ, Dawson AS, Chu KS. Submaximal exercise in persons with stroke: test-retest reliability and concurrent validity with maximal oxygen consumption. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004 Jan;85(1):113-8. doi: 10.1016/s0003-9993(03)00436-2.
PubMed 14970978Peel C, Sawyer Baker P, Roth DL, Brown CJ, Brodner EV, Allman RM. Assessing mobility in older adults: the UAB Study of Aging Life-Space Assessment. Phys Ther. 2005 Oct;85(10):1008-119.
PubMed 16180950
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 23 Jan 2023. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Constraint-induced Movement Therapy to Improve Gait and Mobility of People With Chronic Stroke
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03114046
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 000000
- Conditions
- Rehabilitation, Recovery of Function, Stroke, Lower Extremity Paresis
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 8 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of Alabama at BirminghamUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Jun 2017 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 1 Sep 2018 (actual)
- Study completion
- 1 Oct 2018 (actual)
- First posted
- 14 Apr 2017 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The purpose of this single-subject, concurrent mixed methods study is to investigate the relationship between the effect of the CIMT protocol on gait and mobility and participants' and caregivers' expectations and perceptions regarding the treatment. The goal of the quantitative strand is to assess changes in quality of movement and functional use of the paretic lower limb after the treatment and investigate the participants' expectations in regards the intervention using the Participant Opinion Survey (POS). The qualitative strand (participant interviews) will determine perspectives of caregiver and participant perspectives regarding protocol acceptability. Both quantitative and qualitative data will be collected and analyzed concurrently, through triangulation and complementarity rationales; both data will be equally prioritized.
Detailed description
About 66% of stroke survivors present gait impairment and mobility limitation. Rehabilitation techniques for people with walking and mobility disability after stroke have been broadly investigated in recent decades. However, few rehabilitation approaches have been shown to be effective in resolving these devastating problem.
Constraint-induced Movement Therapy (CIMT) presented robust evidence on increasing the amount and the quality of the paretic upper extremity (UE) functional use in daily situations of individuals with brain injuries (e.g. stroke, traumatic brain injury). The UE CIMT protocol consists of 4 components: 1) repetitive and intensive training; 2) motor training following shaping principles; 3) application of a groups of behavioral strategies called transfer package (TP), and 4) prolonged use of a restriction device on the non-paretic (or less affected) UE.
Considering the importance of repetition, intensity and specificity of the motor training to induce neuroplastic changes (3), CIMT is a potential tool to improve gait and mobility function in people with stroke. The translation of the UE protocol for Lower Extremity (LE) rehabilitation demanded some modifications for use with gait and mobility. For example, restraint of the less affected LE is not used because a different gait pattern would be induced using the restriction device. Also, the TP has been modified for LE function because of its inherent differences from UE function (e.g. both LE are more often used together and because there are more safety consequences involved with gait and mobility (e.g. falling).
In view of the significant efficacy of the UE CIMT for individuals with stroke, the extension of this approach to LE CIMT is promising, but investigation of its effect on mobility and motor function has been insufficient. The few studies that have applied a modified CIMT protocol in people with stroke did not use the full TP component. Thus, information about the effects of the complete CIMT protocol (i.e., including the TP) is greatly need. The addition of the enhanced TP in the LE protocol might have a great impact on both motor outcomes and retention of the results, as observed in previous studies about the UE approach. Considering the high intensity of the complete protocol, the added safety concerns, and the demand of involvement of the therapist, participant, and caregivers, the acceptability of the TP should be explored in order to provide a better understanding of the feasibility of this strategy.
The purpose of this single-subject, concurrent mixed methods study is to investigate the relationship between the effect of the CIMT protocol on gait and mobility and participants' and caregivers' expectations and perceptions regarding the treatment (e.g. intensity, physical and emotional demands, changes in routine). The goal of the quantitative strand is to assess changes in quality of movement and functional use of the paretic lower limb after the treatment and to investigate the participants' expectations in regards the intervention using the Participant Opinion Survey (POS). The qualitative strand (participant interviews) will determine perspectives of caregiver and participant perspectives regarding protocol acceptability. Both quantitative and qualitative data will be collected and analyzed concurrently, through triangulation and complementarity rationales; both data will be equally prioritized (4). We hypothesize that: 1) the enhanced LE CIT protocol will be effective for improving functional use of the paretic LE in people with chronic stroke; and 2) participant's and caregivers opinions are related to changes on functional use.
Aim 1: Assess the effects of the enhanced LE CIMT protocol on LE use and motor function. A single-subject ABA design with chronic stroke participants will be conducted. Individuals with different levels of severity will receive the LE CIMT, including intensive motor training and TP.
Aim 2: Richly characterize participants and caregivers acceptability of the LE CIMT protocol. A qualitative approach will be used for evaluating the acceptability of the protocol. The authors will conduct individual interviews with all participants and their caregivers or family members to determine perspectives of intervention.
Aim 3: Examine how participants and caregivers acceptability can influence changes in motor outcomes after LE CIMT. A mixed method approach will be conducted in order to investigate if there is relationship between effect on motor outcome and individuals' perceptions about the intervention.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 1
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Baseline Phase | Experimental | Behavioral: Lower extremity Constraint-induced movement therapy(LE-CIMT)This project will conduct a single-subject pre-experimental AB mixed methods design, considering A phase as the baseline strand. During this phase multiple assessments will be administered. This phase will last 2 consecutive weeks, with 5 visits total. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 19 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- be 19 years old or older,
- have more than 6 months after stroke;
- present motor impairment on lower extremity due to stroke, but able to walk at least 25 feet using an assistive device or not, at least three times a day;
- have no previous experience with any LE CIMT protocol.
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- presence of uncontrolled clinical conditions;
- presence of other neurologic diseases;
- Mini-mental State Examination score <24
- inability to answer yes and no questions properly;
- score lower than 45 out of 56 on the Berg Balance Scale, and score higher than 5 on LEMAL, what indicates that they are already utilizing the paretic lower limb while performing daily activities.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Lower extremity Constraint-induced movement therapy(LE-CIMT)Both phases (A and B) will last 10 weekdays, and during baseline and treatment phases, the data will be collected on 5 different odd days. Considering the long period of data collection. During the baseline phase, no assessment will be administered on even days. The treatment will be delivered daily, along 10 weekdays, 3.5 hours per day. The motor training will be delivered during 3 hours and 30 minutes will be allocated to the administration of the TP. Both caregivers and participants will be individually interviewed before and after treatment. | Behavioural | Baseline Phase |
Primary outcome
Lower Extremity Motor Activity Log (LE-MAL)
Time frame: The LE-MAL will be administered 10 times along 4 weeks. During the first 2 weeks (baseline phase) the stability of the functional use of the paretic lower extremity will be assessed. The last 2 weeks (intervention) the trend of change will be assessed.
is a semi-structured interview, created in the UAB CIMT laboratory, that consists of asks the participant the level of assistance, how well is her/his performance, and how much confident he/she is during the execution of 14 different daily tasks (e.g walking indoors, climb stairs) (6).
Berg Balance Scale (BBS)
Time frame: The BBS will be administered 10 times along 4 weeks. During the first 2 weeks (baseline phase) the stability of balance will be assessed. The last 2 weeks (intervention) the trend of change will be assessed.
is a valid and reliable tool to assess balance control in 14 static and dynamic activities with people with different health conditions (7).
10 meters walking (10MWT)
Time frame: The 10MWT will be administered 10 times along 4 weeks. During the first 2 weeks (baseline phase) the stability of the gait function will be assessed. The last 2 weeks (intervention) the trend of change will be assessed.
is a gait speed measurement, which is an easy and reliable assessment of locomotion (8).
3 secondary outcomes
5 times sit to stand
Time frame: The test will be administered 10 times along 4 weeks. During the first 2 weeks (baseline phase) the stability of the lower limb function will be assessed. The last 2 weeks (intervention) the trend of change will be assessed.
6 minutes walking test (6MWT)
Time frame: The 6MWT will be administered 10 times along 4 weeks. During the first 2 weeks (baseline phase) the stability of the gait function will be assessed. The last 2 weeks (intervention) the trend of change will be assessed.
Life-Space Assessment (LSA).
Time frame: The test will be administered 10 times along 4 weeks. During the first 2 weeks (baseline phase) the stability of the mobility status will be assessed. The last 2 weeks (intervention) the trend of change will be assessed.
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 23 Jan 2023.
- Background: PubMed 7741609Jorgensen HS, Nakayama H, Raaschou HO, Vive-Larsen J, Stoier M, Olsen TS. Outcome and time course of recovery in stroke. Part II: Time course of recovery. The Copenhagen Stroke Study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1995 May;76(5):406-12. doi: 10.1016/s0003-9993(95)80568-0.
- Background: PubMed 23520237Taub E, Uswatte G, Mark VW, Morris DM, Barman J, Bowman MH, Bryson C, Delgado A, Bishop-McKay S. Method for enhancing real-world use of a more affected arm in chronic stroke: transfer package of constraint-induced movement therapy. Stroke. 2013 May;44(5):1383-8. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.111.000559. Epub 2013 Mar 21.
- Background: PubMed 19801058Lang CE, Macdonald JR, Reisman DS, Boyd L, Jacobson Kimberley T, Schindler-Ivens SM, Hornby TG, Ross SA, Scheets PL. Observation of amounts of movement practice provided during stroke rehabilitation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2009 Oct;90(10):1692-8. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2009.04.005.
- Background: PubMed 23071200Byiers BJ, Reichle J, Symons FJ. Single-subject experimental design for evidence-based practice. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2012 Nov;21(4):397-414. doi: 10.1044/1058-0360(2012/11-0036). Epub 2012 Oct 15.
- Background: PubMed 23111280Mark VW, Taub E, Uswatte G, Bashir K, Cutter GR, Bryson CC, Bishop-McKay S, Bowman MH. Constraint-induced movement therapy for the lower extremities in multiple sclerosis: case series with 4-year follow-up. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2013 Apr;94(4):753-60. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2012.09.032. Epub 2012 Oct 27.
- Background: PubMed 7792547Berg K, Wood-Dauphinee S, Williams JI. The Balance Scale: reliability assessment with elderly residents and patients with an acute stroke. Scand J Rehabil Med. 1995 Mar;27(1):27-36.
- Background: PubMed 12017517Green J, Forster A, Young J. Reliability of gait speed measured by a timed walking test in patients one year after stroke. Clin Rehabil. 2002 May;16(3):306-14. doi: 10.1191/0269215502cr495oa.
- Background: PubMed 20298832Mong Y, Teo TW, Ng SS. 5-repetition sit-to-stand test in subjects with chronic stroke: reliability and validity. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2010 Mar;91(3):407-13. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2009.10.030.
- Background: PubMed 14970978Eng JJ, Dawson AS, Chu KS. Submaximal exercise in persons with stroke: test-retest reliability and concurrent validity with maximal oxygen consumption. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004 Jan;85(1):113-8. doi: 10.1016/s0003-9993(03)00436-2.
- Background: PubMed 16180950Peel C, Sawyer Baker P, Roth DL, Brown CJ, Brodner EV, Allman RM. Assessing mobility in older adults: the UAB Study of Aging Life-Space Assessment. Phys Ther. 2005 Oct;85(10):1008-119.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Rehabilitation
Recruiting
Transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation (tACS) Combined With Cognitive Training in Alzheimer's Disease
Transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation, Alzheimer Disease (AD)
Not yet recruitingEarly Phase 1
Early Botulinum Toxin for Muscle Stiffness Reduction in First-Time Stroke Patients: Improving Recovery and Independence
Spasticity, Stroke
RecruitingObservational study
Early Postoperative Pain Following a Limb Amputation
Amputation, Surgical, Pain Management
Recruiting
Comprehensive Maintenance Program: a Health Haven for COPD in Lleida.The NAPOLEON Project.
COPD - Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Pulmonary Rehabilitation
Enrolling by invitationObservational study
Early Detection of Cerebral Palsy Subtype
Cerebral Palsy, Early Assessment
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Lower extremity Constraint-induced movement therapy(LE-CIMT) in people with Rehabilitation and Recovery of Function, run by University of Alabama at Birmingham at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 4 inclusion and 5 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 23 Jan 2023. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Lower Extremity Motor Activity Log (LE-MAL) (time frame: The LE-MAL will be administered 10 times along 4 weeks. During the first 2 weeks (baseline phase) the stability of the functional use of the paretic lower extremity will be assessed. The last 2 weeks (intervention) the trend of change will be assessed.). The study lists 3 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT03114046, which also lists 10 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 23 Jan 2023; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 6 Nov 2026.