StrokeiTMSNCT06153017
iTMS - Implementing Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) to Assess Cortico-spinal Tract Integrity
An observational study of Stroke, run by University of Aarhus at 1 site in Denmark.
Trial summary
Reliable prediction of upper limb (UL) function can guide clinicians in choosing relevant treatment, helps to set realistic goals for rehabilitation and will contribute to personalized and effective rehabilitation. TMS has been identified as a strong predictor of future UL function after stroke. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Stroke
- How many people
- 100 participants
- Where
- 1 siteDenmark
- Study dates
- 1 May 2023to 31 Dec 2025
- Phase
- Observational
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
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 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Study population: We include patients with stroke and severe paresis or paralysis of an upper limb after stroke.
Who may be able to join
- admitted to rehabilitation within 21 days after stroke
- severe UL impairment, either paralysis (no active movement), or severe paresis, defined as Fugl-Meyer Assessment <17 or Shoulder Abduction Finger Extension (SAFE) score < 5
- At least 18 years old
- able to provide informed consent and comply with examination procedures
Who cannot join
- Epilepsy
- Metal implants in the head
- Other implanted electronics (cardiac pacemaker, defibrillator, cochlear implant, medication pump)
- Skull fracture or serious head injury
- Pregnancy
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Denmark1 site
Hammel Neurorehabilitation Centre and University Research Clinic
Hammel, Aarhus, 8450
About this study
Reliable prediction of upper limb (UL) function can guide clinicians in choosing relevant treatment, helps to set realistic goals for rehabilitation and will contribute to personalized and effective rehabilitation. TMS has been identified as a strong predictor of future UL function after stroke. With this project, the investigators want to implement the standard use of TMS examination for a defined patient group in the clinical setting and systematically evaluate the implementation process. The impact and perceived value of TMS in the clinical setting will be evaluated and the predictive value of TMS for the specific patient population will be assessed.
Read the detailed description
Design Design: A prospective longitudinal implementation study. Setting and population: The implementation will take place at Hammel Neurorehabilitation Centre and University Research Clinic. The target population are patients with stroke.
Management The study will be organized by the Research Unit at Hammel Neurocenter, Iris Brunner, associate professor, PhD, in collaboration with the Center Management represented by head physician Kåre Eg Severinsen, MD, PhD and the unit for professional development, represented by Camilla Biering Lundquist PhD.
Evaluation of the implementation The RE-AIM framework, and its extension, the Practical Implementation Sustainability Model (PRISM) framework will be applied to guide and evaluate the implementation process. The RE-AIM framework has been used in numerous studies and hosts a homepage with comprehensive online resources for planning, evaluating and reporting implementation studies.
Briefly, it consists of the following components to evaluate the success of an implementation:
Reach. Refers to percent of individuals who are reached by the intervention. In the context of the present study, Reach would describe the number of patients for whom the TMS examination would be relevant, and the percentage of patients who received TMS, and reasons for not being examined.
- Evaluation of Reach through monitoring of 4 selected wards with the help of the Business Intelligence (BI) portal.
Effectiveness: Entails the measurement of primary and broader outcomes. In this study, Effectiveness would assess the prediction accuracy for the specific population at the hospital.
- Evaluation of Effectiveness. Fifty patients will be recruited consecutively from all wards at Hammel Neurorehabilitation Center's sites Hammel and Skive. Follow-up assessments of UL function will be conducted at 3 months post-stroke with the tests of UL function described in 3d. It will be assessed if individual predictions based on TMS and clinical tests will reach a specificity of 80% or more. In addition, sensitivity, PPV, NPV and overall accuracy/ CCP including 95% CI will be calculated.
Adoption. The level of actual uptake of the new intervention. Specifically in this study the number of referrals of relevant patients from different wards. Moreover, the number of involved staff (therapists, MDs) with a positive attitude to the TMS examination.
- Evaluation of adoption will based on quantitative data from monitoring, questionnaires, and interviews.
Implementation. Description of the actual resources and cost allocated, intervention fidelity, and acceptance.
- Implementation is evaluated with regard to intervention fidelity. In this case, can patients be examined with TMS within the planned time after stroke and is the workload for trained examiners distributed as agreed on.
Maintenance. Measures the long-term attrition to an intervention on an individual and a setting level.
- Among others, the following questions will be addressed: Are the potential obstacles identified in previous components of reach addressed? Is the rate of patients referred to TMS stable over time? Can examination skills be maintained or is there need for a boost? Has new staff been introduced to perform the TMS procedure? Based on these questions and the feedback from questionnaires and interviews the investigators will continuously respond to threats to maintenance and adapt maintenance strategies accordingly.
- Conditions
- Stroke
- Keywords
- Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation, Upper limb function, Stroke, Neurorehabilitation, Implementation, Biomarker
- Medical subject headings
- Stroke
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Action Research Arm Test
Assesses arm motor function, range 0-57 (best)
Measured: 3 months after stroke
Secondary outcomes (2)
Shoulder Abduction Finger Extension Test
Assesses impairment for shoulder abduction and finger extension (0-10 best)
Measured: 3 months after stroke
Fugl-Meyer Motor Assessment Upper Limb (0-66 best)
Assesses upper limb motor impairment
Measured: 3 months after stroke
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted1 Dec 2023
- Study start1 May 2023
- Primary completion31 Dec 2025 (estimated)
- Study completion31 Dec 2025 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for StrokeStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- 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
- Observational
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Enrolment
- 100 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Aarhus
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Hammel Neurocenter University Hospital and Research Clinic
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Iris Charlotte Brunner, University of Aarhus
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06153017
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- iTMS786101
- Acronym
- iTMS
- Status last verified
- May 2025
- First submitted
- 14 Jun 2023
- Last updated
- 21 May 2025
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
Publications
Feldbaek RM, Brunner IC, Lundquist CB. Prediction of Motor Outcome in Patients With Severe Upper Limb Impairment After Stroke Using Motor Evoked Potentials. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2026 May 15:15459683261442196. doi: 10.1177/15459683261442196. Online ahead of print.
PubMed 42140614
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 21 May 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- iTMS - Implementing Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) to Assess Cortico-spinal Tract Integrity
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06153017
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- iTMS / iTMS786101
- Conditions
- Stroke
- Keywords
- Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation, Upper limb function, Stroke, Neurorehabilitation, Implementation, Biomarker
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Active, not recruiting
- Enrolment
- 100 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- University of AarhusUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Hammel Neurocenter University Hospital and Research Clinic
- Study start
- 1 May 2023 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 31 Dec 2025 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 31 Dec 2025 (estimated)
- First posted
- 1 Dec 2023 (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.
Reliable prediction of upper limb (UL) function can guide clinicians in choosing relevant treatment, helps to set realistic goals for rehabilitation and will contribute to personalized and effective rehabilitation. TMS has been identified as a strong predictor of future UL function after stroke. With this project, the investigators want to implement the standard use of TMS examination for a defined patient group in the clinical setting and systematically evaluate the implementation process. The impact and perceived value of TMS in the clinical setting will be evaluated and the predictive value of TMS for the specific patient population will be assessed.
Detailed description
Design Design: A prospective longitudinal implementation study. Setting and population: The implementation will take place at Hammel Neurorehabilitation Centre and University Research Clinic. The target population are patients with stroke.
Management The study will be organized by the Research Unit at Hammel Neurocenter, Iris Brunner, associate professor, PhD, in collaboration with the Center Management represented by head physician Kåre Eg Severinsen, MD, PhD and the unit for professional development, represented by Camilla Biering Lundquist PhD.
Evaluation of the implementation The RE-AIM framework, and its extension, the Practical Implementation Sustainability Model (PRISM) framework will be applied to guide and evaluate the implementation process. The RE-AIM framework has been used in numerous studies and hosts a homepage with comprehensive online resources for planning, evaluating and reporting implementation studies.
Briefly, it consists of the following components to evaluate the success of an implementation:
Reach. Refers to percent of individuals who are reached by the intervention. In the context of the present study, Reach would describe the number of patients for whom the TMS examination would be relevant, and the percentage of patients who received TMS, and reasons for not being examined.
- Evaluation of Reach through monitoring of 4 selected wards with the help of the Business Intelligence (BI) portal.
Effectiveness: Entails the measurement of primary and broader outcomes. In this study, Effectiveness would assess the prediction accuracy for the specific population at the hospital.
- Evaluation of Effectiveness. Fifty patients will be recruited consecutively from all wards at Hammel Neurorehabilitation Center's sites Hammel and Skive. Follow-up assessments of UL function will be conducted at 3 months post-stroke with the tests of UL function described in 3d. It will be assessed if individual predictions based on TMS and clinical tests will reach a specificity of 80% or more. In addition, sensitivity, PPV, NPV and overall accuracy/ CCP including 95% CI will be calculated.
Adoption. The level of actual uptake of the new intervention. Specifically in this study the number of referrals of relevant patients from different wards. Moreover, the number of involved staff (therapists, MDs) with a positive attitude to the TMS examination.
- Evaluation of adoption will based on quantitative data from monitoring, questionnaires, and interviews.
Implementation. Description of the actual resources and cost allocated, intervention fidelity, and acceptance.
- Implementation is evaluated with regard to intervention fidelity. In this case, can patients be examined with TMS within the planned time after stroke and is the workload for trained examiners distributed as agreed on.
Maintenance. Measures the long-term attrition to an intervention on an individual and a setting level.
- Among others, the following questions will be addressed: Are the potential obstacles identified in previous components of reach addressed? Is the rate of patients referred to TMS stable over time? Can examination skills be maintained or is there need for a boost? Has new staff been introduced to perform the TMS procedure? Based on these questions and the feedback from questionnaires and interviews the investigators will continuously respond to threats to maintenance and adapt maintenance strategies accordingly.
Study design
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- We include patients with stroke and severe paresis or paralysis of an upper limb after stroke.
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- admitted to rehabilitation within 21 days after stroke
- severe UL impairment, either paralysis (no active movement), or severe paresis, defined as Fugl-Meyer Assessment <17 or Shoulder Abduction Finger Extension (SAFE) score < 5
- At least 18 years old
- able to provide informed consent and comply with examination procedures
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Epilepsy
- Metal implants in the head
- Other implanted electronics (cardiac pacemaker, defibrillator, cochlear implant, medication pump)
- Skull fracture or serious head injury
- Pregnancy
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Primary outcome
Action Research Arm Test
Time frame: 3 months after stroke
Assesses arm motor function, range 0-57 (best)
2 secondary outcomes
Shoulder Abduction Finger Extension Test
Time frame: 3 months after stroke
Fugl-Meyer Motor Assessment Upper Limb (0-66 best)
Time frame: 3 months after stroke
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 21 May 2025.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 42140614Feldbaek RM, Brunner IC, Lundquist CB. Prediction of Motor Outcome in Patients With Severe Upper Limb Impairment After Stroke Using Motor Evoked Potentials. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2026 May 15:15459683261442196. doi: 10.1177/15459683261442196. Online ahead of print.
Related trials for Stroke
Not yet recruiting
Temporal Interference Stimulation for Upper-Limb Motor Recovery in Early Subacute Stroke
Acute Ischemic Stroke
RecruitingObservational study
ELATE Study: Evaluating Large-vessel Acute Thrombectomy in Extended Time Window
Acute Ichemic Stroke
Recruiting
Web-Based Tele-Rehabilitation Using Action Observation and Mirror Therapy for Subacute Stroke: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Stroke, Upper Extremity Paresis
Recruiting
Early Motor-Cognitive Integrative Training on Cognitive and Motor Performance in Patients With Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage
Subarachnoid Aneurysm Hemorrhage
Not yet recruiting
Selective Intra-Arterial Hypothermia After Endovascular Treatment for Acute Basilar Artery Occlusion
Acute Ischemic Stroke, Basilar Artery Occlusion
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?
An observational study of Stroke, run by University of Aarhus at 1 site in Denmark.
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: under way, not looking for participants, as of the sponsor's last update on 21 May 2025. 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 Denmark. 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?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
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?
Action Research Arm Test (time frame: 3 months after stroke). 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 NCT06153017, which also lists 1 linked publication.
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 21 May 2025.