AzTrials
AzTrials

StrokeNCT05729633

Robot Mediated Therapy-Feasibility Study and Preliminary Effects

A study testing Robot mediated upper limb therapy in people with Stroke, run by Changi General Hospital.

Unknown status

Status not confirmed. The sponsor has not verified this record for over two years, so it may be out of date.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

The goal of this clinical trial is to investigate the feasibility of the application of robot mediated impairment-training (RMIT) and robot mediated task-specific training (RMTT) in acute stroke patients with upper limb impairments. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 21 to 99 years
Conditions the study is for
Stroke
What is being tested?
Robot mediated upper limb therapy
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
4 participants
Where
No sites listed yet
Study dates
Feb 2023to Jul 2023
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 21 to 99 years
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • Diagnosis of stroke as evidenced by CT/MRI findings
  • First-ever stroke (ischaemic or haemorrhagic)
  • Upper limb weakness and an FMA-UE score of 16-53 (severe to moderate: 16-34. moderate to mild: 35-53)12,13
  • Cognitively intact to follow instructions
  • Medically stable to participate
  • Consent given
  • Age 21 and above (investigating adult stroke patients)

Who cannot join

  • Fractures or other musculoskeletal issues that render the use of the robotic device unsuitable
  • Involvement in another concurrent upper limb study
  • Wounds that do not allow donning of the device
  • Severe spasticity
  • Cognitive impairment (MMSE ≤20)
  • Inability to follow instructions
  • Severe osteoporosis
  • Infectious diseases

Trial locations and contacts

No sites are listed yet.

About this study

Official title: Robot-Mediated Impairment-Oriented and Task-Specific Training (RMIT and RMTT) on Upper Limb Post Stroke: Feasibility and Preliminary Effects on Physical Function and Quality of Life

The goal of this clinical trial is to investigate the feasibility of the application of robot mediated impairment-training (RMIT) and robot mediated task-specific training (RMTT) in acute stroke patients with upper limb impairments.

The main question[s] it aims to answer are:

  • Is it feasible and safe to conduct RMIT and RMTT in acute stroke patients with upper limb impairments?
  • What are the preliminary effects on the physical function and quality of life in these patients?

Participants will undergo 20 hours of robot mediated upper limb therapy.

Researchers will compare RMIT with RMIT+RMTT to see if there are any differences in the effects on physical function and quality of life.

Read the detailed description
  1. BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE Stroke is among the top 10 causes of hospitalisation in Singapore. Approximately 630 stroke patients were transferred to our inpatient rehabilitation unit in 2021. Upper limb impairments are common after stroke and may result in loss of function, including self-care activities. Intensity of therapy is thus important for post-stroke recovery. A Cochrane overview of systematic reviews suggested that arm function can be improved by providing at least 20 hours of additional repetitive task training to patients. However, providing sufficient therapy remains a challenge due to various reasons, including manpower shortages. Robotic-mediated rehabilitation is an innovative exercise-based therapy using robotic devices that enables the implementation of highly repetitive, intensive, adaptive, and quantifiable physical training. The RATULS trial showed that neither robot-assisted training using the MIT-Manus robotic gym nor an enhanced upper limb therapy (EULT) programme based on repetitive functional task practice improved upper limb function after stroke, as compared to usual care, for patients with moderate-to-severe upper limb functional limitations. It was suggested that further research was needed to find ways to translate the improvements in upper limb impairments seen with robot-assisted therapy into upper limb function and their activities of daily living (ADLs). In a systematic review and meta-analysis on the effects of robot-assisted therapy on the upper limb, it was found that although there were improvements in strength, this was not translated to improvements in activities of daily living. Additional transition to task training (facilitated by therapists) had been added to robot-mediated impairment training (RMIT) in various studies. In a study by Hung8, robot-assisted therapy combined with occupational therapist (OT)-facilitated task specific training was found to be superior to robot-assisted therapy combined with OT-facilitated impairment-oriented training. Task-specific training consists of repetitively practising the tasks that are most relevant to the patient and their personal context, whereas impairment-oriented therapy emphasises remediation of motor deficits with a focus on single joint movements at a time. A study that investigated Reharob, a robotic device used to assist patients living with chronic stroke in performing 5 ADLs, showed that patients had significant improvements on the Fugl-Meyer Assessment - Upper Extremity (FMA-UE), Action Research Arm Test (ARAT) and Functional Independence Measure (FIM). This is the only study that has been found addressing robot-mediated task-specific training thus far (RMTT). This study aims to determine the feasibility of the application of both RMIT and RMTT utilizing the robotic device- Optimo Regen. From a review of the prevalent literature, there has been no study on the comparison of RMTT + RMIT against RMIT alone. A search for RMTT only yielded the study on Reharob, but the robot only administered RMTT and not RMIT. The preliminary effects of the intervention on physical function and quality of life will be studied. The target patients would be those with acute stroke undergoing rehabilitation in an acute inpatient rehabilitation unit. Robotic therapy can continue when they are discharged, in the outpatient clinic. According to a study on the cost of hospital care, the bulk of the hospitalisation cost went to ward charges (38.2%) with much less coming from therapy (7.3%). It thus makes sense to increase the intensity of rehabilitation so that patients may recover faster and be discharged earlier. Making therapy more available in the outpatient setting where wait times are currently long would also be advantageous.
  2. HYPOTHESIS AND OBJECTIVES Hypothesis: Robot-mediated impairment-oriented and task-sepcific training improves upper limb function and is safe and feasible Objectives: To assess the feasibility of conducting robot mediated impairment-oriented training and task-specific training and to study the benefits on physical function and quality of life.
Conditions
Stroke
Being tested
Robot mediated upper limb therapy
Medical subject headings
Stroke

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • Robot mediated upper limb therapyOther

    The OR is classified as a Class A device with the Health Sciences Authority. The OR is capable of both delivering RMIT as well as RMTT. It can provide zero, partial, or full assistance to the patient to complete the movement or task. Its teach-and-follow mode allows a movement to be performed by the therapist, with the device then "replaying" the movement at either zero, partial, or full assistance, for the patient.

    Impairment oriented training will focus on the following movements:

    1. Diagonal movement
    2. Shoulder abduction
    3. Shoulder adduction
    4. Shoulder flexion
    5. Shoulder extension
    6. Elbow flexion
    7. Elbow extension

    Task-specific training will focus on the following activities:

    1. Picking up a cup/glass by the side and drink
    2. Brushing hair
    3. Cleaning unaffected upper limb (hand to arm)
    4. Wiping table
    5. Wiping wall
    6. Sliding card on table to a designated location
    7. Clipping a clothe peg
Study groups in NCT05729633
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Robot mediated Impairment-oriented training(RMIT)ExperimentalParticipant receives 20 hours of robot mediated impairment-oriented training applied via the Optimo Regen
Receives: Other: Robot mediated upper limb therapy
Robot mediated impairment-orientyed and task-specific training (RMIT+RMTT)ExperimentalParticipant receives a total of 20 hours of robotic therapy. 10 hours will be in the form of RMIT and 10 hours in the form of RMTT
Receives: Other: Robot mediated upper limb therapy

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Change of FMA-UE (Fugl Meyer Assessment for Upper Extremity) from baseline

    30 items assessing motor function and 3 items assessing reflex function (0-66, higher score indicates better outcome)

    Measured: baseline, 1 month and 3 months post commencement of intervention

Secondary outcomes (10)
  1. Change of FMA-UA (Fugl Meyer Assessment-Upper Arm) from baseline

    subset of FMA-UE(0-36, higher score indicates better outcome)

    Measured: baseline, 1 month and 3 months post commencement of intervention

  2. Change of FMA-W/H(Fugl Meyer Assessment-Wrist/Hand) from baseline

    subset of FMA-UE (0-30, higher score indicates better outcome)

    Measured: baseline, 1 month and 3 months post commencement of intervention

  3. Change of FAT (Frenchay Arm Test) from baseline

    Upper limb functional assessment (0-5, higher score indicates better outcome)

    Measured: baseline, 1 month and 3 months post baseline

  4. Change of FIM (Functional Independence Measure) from baseline

    Functional outcome measure, mainly used in inpatient setting (18-126, higher score indicate better outcome)

    Measured: baseline, 1 month, 3 months post baseline

  5. Change of MMT (manual muscle testing) from baseline

    using the Medical Research Council (0-5, higher indicate better outcome)

    Measured: baseline, 1 month and 3 months post baseline

  6. Change MAS (Modified Ashworth Scale) from baseline

    spasticity assessment scale (0-4, lower indicates better outcome)

    Measured: baseline, 1 month and 3 months post baseline

  7. Change of EQ-5D from baseline

    Quality of Life Questionaire ( 0-100, higher score indicates better outcome)

    Measured: baseline, 1 month and 3 months post baseline

  8. Change of HADS (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale) from baseline

    Measurement of mood (0-42, more than 8 points in each subcategory indicates considerable symptoms of anxiety or depression)

    Measured: baseline, 1 month and 3 months post baseline

  9. Change of patient satisfaction survey from baseline

    Patient satisfaction survey (8-40, higher score indicate good outcome)

    Measured: baseline, 1 month and 3 months post baseline

  10. Difference in the presence of Adverse effects

    fatigue, pain, injuries (present or absent. Absent denotes better outcome)

    Measured: baseline, 1 month and 3 months post baseline

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted15 Feb 2023
  2. Study startFeb 2023 (estimated)
  3. Primary completionApr 2023 (estimated)
  4. Study completionJul 2023 (estimated)

Resources

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
Randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Model description
Randomized controlled study
Masking
Double blind
Who is masked
Care provider, Outcomes assessor
Enrolment
4 participants (estimated)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT05729633
Sponsor's protocol ID
202301-00007
Status last verified
Feb 2023
First submitted
11 Jan 2023
Last updated
15 Feb 2023
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
No

Publications

  • Conroy SS, Wittenberg GF, Krebs HI, Zhan M, Bever CT, Whitall J. Robot-Assisted Arm Training in Chronic Stroke: Addition of Transition-to-Task Practice. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2019 Sep;33(9):751-761. doi: 10.1177/1545968319862558. Epub 2019 Jul 22.

    PubMed 31328671
  • Mehrholz J, Pohl M, Platz T, Kugler J, Elsner B. Electromechanical and robot-assisted arm training for improving activities of daily living, arm function, and arm muscle strength after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Sep 3;9(9):CD006876. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006876.pub5.

    PubMed 30175845
  • Hung CS, Hsieh YW, Wu CY, Lin KC, Lin JC, Yeh LM, Yin HP. Comparative Assessment of Two Robot-Assisted Therapies for the Upper Extremity in People With Chronic Stroke. Am J Occup Ther. 2019 Jan/Feb;73(1):7301205010p1-7301205010p9. doi: 10.5014/ajot.2019.022368.

    PubMed 30839256

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing Robot mediated upper limb therapy in people with Stroke, run by Changi General Hospital.

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 7 inclusion and 8 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: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 15 Feb 2023. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

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?

Results are not available in the source record.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

Contact San San Tay, MBBS (+6569366455, tay.san.san@singhealth.com.sg), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Change of FMA-UE (Fugl Meyer Assessment for Upper Extremity) from baseline (time frame: baseline, 1 month and 3 months post commencement of intervention). 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 NCT05729633, which also lists 3 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 15 Feb 2023.

Free account

Keep searching with a free account

You’ve used your 3 free searches for this session. Log in or create a free AzTrials account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in
Clinical Trial NCT05729633 | AzTrials