AzTrials
AzTrials

Stroke, CerebrovascularNCT06179745

BCI Driving FES and Hand Orthosis for Upper Limb Rehabilitation in Chronic Stroke

A study testing EEG-based brain-computer interface, Functional Electrical Stimulation and Active hand orthosis in people with Stroke, Cerebrovascular and Hemiplegia and Hemiparesis, run by University of Essex at 1 site in Italy.

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 The sponsor has not verified this record for over two years, so it may be out of date.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

Multi-center, randomized, sham-controlled, double-blind, longitudinal, experimental clinical study to investigate functional recovery effects on the upper limb in chronic stroke patients and the accompanying neural plasticity mechanisms after the application of a brain-computer interface (BCI)-driven functional… Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 years and older
What is being tested?
EEG-based brain-computer interface, Functional Electrical Stimulation and Active hand orthosis
Type of treatment
Medical device
Could I receive a placebo?
Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
How many people
32 participants
Where
1 siteItaly
Study dates
14 Mar 2022to 31 Mar 2025
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 18 years and older
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • More than 18 years of age
  • Victim of ischemic or haemorrhagic cerebrovascular accident (CVA)
  • At least 6 months since occurrence of CVA. No upper limit on time since stroke is imposed
  • First CVA
  • Severe central paresis or complete paralysis of the upper limb, as quantified by a Medical Research Council (MRC) scale score ≤2 evaluated at the wrist and finger extension and flexion, and forearm flexion and extension Other concomitant motor disabilities do not constitute exclusion criteria.
  • Unilateral cortical lesions (left or right hemisphere), subcortical lesions or supra-pontic lesions of the corticospinal tract having caused paralysis of the upper limb as documented by radiologic evidence
  • Adequate or corrected vision

Who cannot join

  • Any reason obstructing EEG acquisition (scalp infections or wounds, dermatitis, etc)
  • Severe concomitant diseases (fever, infections, cardiac conditions, etc)
  • Heavy medication affecting the central nervous system (CNS, especially vigilance)
  • CVA with multiple infarcts
  • Second or later CVA
  • Severe unilateral hemispatial neglect as assessed by the behavioural part of the Behavioural Inattention Test (BIT) and the Fluff Test for body neglect
Show all 12Show fewer
  • Severe cognitive disability affecting speech production, communication (e.g. aphasia), the ability to understand and give clear and free informed consent and to fully understand and comply with protocol instructions. A score of above 22/30 of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) scale is advised Inability to concentrate for 2 consecutive hours
  • Concomitant neurological conditions (e.g. Parkinson's disease) Severe spasticity. The Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS) score at the elbow, wrist and fingers should be below or equal to 2.
  • Severe dystonia, dyskinesia or pain
  • Cardiac pacemaker, active implants and other contraindications for FES
  • Metallic implants affecting EEG acquisition
  • Patients for whom it is not possible to evoke a MEP greater than or equal to 0.2 mV amplitude at rest from the FDI and more proximal muscles (like ECR, FDS, etc) of the affected limb, or with contraindications for the TMS or Diffusion Tensor Imaging (DTI) protocols, will not undergo the respective procedures but will not be excluded from the trial.

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

Serafeim Perdikis, PhD contact

00447394404046

serafeim.perdikis@essex.ac.uk

Viviana Versace, PhD, MD contact

0039472774580

viviana.versace@sabes.it

Italy1 site, 1 recruiting
  • Ospedale di Vipiteno | Azienda Sanitaria dell'Alto Adige

    Sterzing, Trentino-Alto Adige, 39049

    Viviana Versace, PhD MD, 00390472774580, viviana.versace@sabes.it

    Recruiting

Other trials in Italy

About this study

Official title: Study of Functional Electrical Stimulation With Assistive Support Driven by a Brain-Computer Interface on the Upper Limb Rehabilitation of Chronic Stroke Patients

Multi-center, randomized, sham-controlled, double-blind, longitudinal, experimental clinical study to investigate functional recovery effects on the upper limb in chronic stroke patients and the accompanying neural plasticity mechanisms after the application of a brain-computer interface (BCI)-driven functional electrical stimulation (FES) therapy supported by an assistive device (hand orthosis). All the equipment used during the study will be applied in compliance with the indications and methods of use for which it is authorized. Therefore, the results will not extend the indications for the use of the equipment and will not explicitly target industrial development. The study is non-profit and is aimed at improving clinical practice. The study involves two clinical centers. The promoting center is the Vipiteno Neurorehabilitation Department, Italy. The aggregate experimentation center is the Neurology Department of Hochzirl Hospital, Austria. The University of Essex, United Kingdom is the technology provider and data analysis center.

Read the detailed description

This study will investigate whether the combination of FES and an active orthosis assisting the execution of "reach-to-grasp and release" functional arm movements, triggered by a non-invasive, EEG-based BCI, can promote clinically relevant functional recovery of the upper limb in hemiplegic chronic stroke patients,.

The BCI detects sensorimotor rhythms (SMRs) associated with the motor intent of the corresponding attempted movements.

In the study group, only when BCI detects sensorimotor rhythms (SMRs) associated with motor intent, the assistive devices are triggered.

In the control group the assistive devices are triggered randomly (decoupled from the entrained cortical activity).

Similarly to previous BCI-based interventions, the main rationale of the study is that the BCI may transform the FES and orthosis-based therapies and augment their efficacy by restoring the intention-action-perception loop and the contingency between efferent motor commands and afferent sensory feedback. In order to specifically study the contribution of the BCI isolated from the main confounds, a sham control which preserves FES and orthotic support and only removes (blind to both the participants and the therapists) the timely coupling of stimulation to suitable SMR EEG activity is preferred over other control candidates (conventional therapies, no therapy, other placebo approaches).

Unlike most previous BCI-based interventions, a more complex functional movement of the upper limb is selected which further involves object manipulation, targeting larger clinical effect and higher impact in terms of Activities of Daily Living (ADL). Further probing on the hypothesis that richer feedback may account for larger benefits, the FES is complemented with a concurrently triggered active orthosis meant to smooth the grasping movement pattern and deliver more accurate proprioceptive feedback.

Next to the main hypothesis of verifying the added value of the BCI component in terms of functional recovery but, very importantly, pre-, post-intervention and follow-up assessments with several Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS)-based protocols and high-density EEG will serve so that this study takes a closer look on the intracortical and corticospinal tract plasticity mechanisms accompanying the therapy.

The choice of studying a chronic stroke population is motivated by the ensemble of results acquired in previous BCI-based trials which suggest larger efficacy in this group.

Objective The main objective of this study is to show that a combined FES and orthotic-assistance intervention leads to significantly better (in the statistical sense) functional improvement of the upper limb indexed with the Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA) scale for the upper limb (FMA-UE) when driven by an SMR-based BCI compared to a sham controller, and that recovery can be lasting and clinically relevant.

The hypothesized outcome upon study completion is a significant interaction between the within-subject factor "time" (pre- and post-intervention) and the between-subject factor "Group" (BCI vs Sham) when performing a mixed-design ANOVA on the study's primary outcome. Additionally, the BCI group is expected to yield significantly higher primary outcome values post-intervention (compared to baseline) with suitable post-hoc testing. This difference should also exceed what is considered the clinically relevant threshold for chronic stroke samples. The BCI group should ideally also be significantly higher in terms of primary outcome compared to the Sham group at the post-intervention and follow-up time points, but not at baseline (pre-intervention assessment). It is a necessary prerequisite for confirming our hypothesis that at least the difference with respect to the primary outcome between post- and pre-intervention sessions is significantly larger in the BCI arm. Deriving similar effects with respect to the defined secondary clinical outcomes, especially those related to ADL, is desirable.

The secondary (but of critical importance to the scientific question posed) objective of this study is to demonstrate that greater functional recovery in the BCI group is associated with activity-dependent neural plasticity phenomena taking place (or, being profound) only within this group. The effects of the proposed therapy on motor cortex plasticity and Cortico-Spinal Tract (CST) excitability will be evaluated pre- and post-intervention, as well as at follow-up. The excitability of the primary motor cortex and of the corticospinal projections will be indexed with Motor Evoked Potential (MEP) amplitude and latency, resting and active motor threshold (RMT, AMT) after single-pulse TMS, and with the intracortical inhibition and facilitation paradigm to paired-pulse TMS, studied in the first dorsal interosseus (FDI) muscle or in more proximal muscles in case of lack of FDI-MEPs (e.g. extensor carpi radialis, ECR, or flexor digitorum superficialis, FDS).

The synaptic plasticity of the motor cortex will be assessed through the modulation of MEP amplitude after the rapid paired associative stimulation (rPAS) protocol. Changes in motor cortex plasticity and excitability are expected to follow the same trend as outlined above for the primary clinical outcome and, additionally, post-pre differences are anticipated to significantly correlate with the corresponding primary outcome differences (for each individual participant), both within each group and, especially, when pulling all subjects together. It is also assumed that the same effects will be observed for EEG correlates (e.g., functional connectivity within or across motor, premotor and sensory areas of the two hemispheres, event-related synchronization/desynchronization ERD/ERS, etc.) of motor attempt using pre- and post-intervention screening sessions, as well as analyzing the EEG data of the therapeutic sessions.

The possibility of Diffusion Tensor Imaging (where patients perform similar reach-and-grasp movements inside the scanner) to more profoundly study structural plasticity pre- and post-intervention will be pursued for eligible patients that agree to undergo this procedure.

Being tested
EEG-based brain-computer interface, Sham EEG-based brain-computer interface, Functional Electrical Stimulation, Active hand orthosis
Medical subject headings
Stroke, Hemiplegia, Paresis

What participants receive

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

  • EEG-based brain-computer interfaceCombination product

    EEG-based brain-computer interface detecting the patient's EEG sensorimotor rhythms associated to attempted reach-gasp-release upper limb movements by the patient.

  • Sham EEG-based brain-computer interfaceCombination product

    Fake (Sham) EEG-based brain-computer interface which outputs a decision at random about whether EEG sensorimotor rhythms associated to attempted reach-gasp-release upper limb movements by the patient are currently detected.

  • Functional Electrical StimulationDevice

    Neuromuscular stimulation of several upper limb muscles (elbow extensors, hand extensors/flexors) to effectuate reach, grasp and release movements of the affected upper limb.

  • Active hand orthosisDevice

    Active hand orthosis effectuating reach, grasp and release movements of the affected uppe r limb.

Study groups in NCT06179745
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Brain-computer interface (BCI)ExperimentalIn the BCI arm, FES stimulation and orthosis triggering are only initiated when the BCI infers "on line" (in real time) the presence of adequate SMRs or ERD/ERS within the epoch. That is, there is precise contingency between the efferent motor command and the afferent feedback induced by BCI-driven actuators (the patient feels he/she can move his upper limb when he wants to do it).
Receives: Combination Product: EEG-based brain-computer interface; Device: Functional Electrical Stimulation; Device: Active hand orthosis
Sham-Brain-computer interface (Sham-BCI)Sham comparatorIn the Sham-BCI group, any EEG signals encoding motor intention of the patient are ignored. FES/orthosis triggering is decided at random, by "playing back" the data of a randomly selected run of a previously recruited participant. Hence, in the Sham-BCI arm, there is no guaranteed contingency between the efferent motor command and the afferent feedback induced by the FES and the orthosis, although it can still happen by coincidence.
Receives: Combination Product: Sham EEG-based brain-computer interface; Device: Functional Electrical Stimulation; Device: Active hand orthosis

What is being measured

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

  1. Fugl-Meyer Assessment - Upper Extremity (FMA-UE)

    Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA), upper limb department (FMA-UE) including reflexes (0-66 scale). The higher the FMA-UE outcome, the less the disability of the upper limb.

    Measured: Pre-intervention (1-2 days before intervention onset), immediately post-intervention and 6-month follow-up (at least 6 months after the end of the intervention)

Secondary outcomes (2)
  1. Medical Research Council (MRC) muscle strength

    MRCl muscle strength on triceps, finger and wrist flexor/extensors and on elbow extensor muscles. For each muscle, MRC may have a value in [0, 5], where 0 indicates complete paralysis and 5 normal muscle strength (no disability)

    Measured: Pre-intervention (1-2 days before intervention onset), immediately post-intervention and 6-month follow-up (at least 6 months after the end of the intervention)

  2. Self-efficacy of daily living

    12-item (questions) scale assessing aptitude in performing activities of daily living. Each item offers a score in [0,4], so that the overall scale is between [0, 48], where 0 indicates complete inability to perform activities of daily living and 48 indicates aptitude equivalent to a person with no disability.

    Measured: Pre-intervention (1-2 days before intervention onset), immediately post-intervention and 6-month follow-up (at least 6 months after the end of the intervention)

Timeline

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

  1. First posted22 Dec 2023
  2. Study start14 Mar 2022
  3. Primary completion31 Mar 2025 (estimated)
  4. Study completion31 Mar 2025 (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
Allocation to the two experimental groups (BCI and Sham) will be taking place at the University of Essex, so as to ensure therapists in the recruitment center remain blind to this information. A toolbox implementing Frane's minimization algorithm (Frane 1998), built by the University of Essex partners will be employed. Use of a covariate adaptive randomization algorithm is dictated by several reasons. First, patients will be recruited on the fly and the studied sample will not be known at trial onset, so that an adaptive allocation method is needed and stratified randomization methods are excluded. The identified possible confounding factors that will be balanced are: Group (BCI vs Sham), Age (in years), Gender, Time since CVA (in months), Primary outcome at pre-intervention screening time point, Lesion type (haemorrhagic vs ischemic), Lesion location (cortical vs subcortical), Lesion side (left vs right), Pre-treatment of spasticity (yes or no).
Masking
Triple blind
Who is masked
Participant, Care provider, Outcomes assessor
Enrolment
32 participants (estimated)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT06179745
Sponsor's protocol ID
BCIFESOrthosis
Status last verified
Dec 2023
First submitted
30 Nov 2023
Last updated
22 Dec 2023
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
Undecided: EEG/TMS data will be publicly shared after scientific publication of outcomes

Publications

  • Cervera MA, Soekadar SR, Ushiba J, Millan JDR, Liu M, Birbaumer N, Garipelli G. Brain-computer interfaces for post-stroke motor rehabilitation: a meta-analysis. Ann Clin Transl Neurol. 2018 Mar 25;5(5):651-663. doi: 10.1002/acn3.544. eCollection 2018 May.

    PubMed 29761128
  • Biasiucci A, Leeb R, Iturrate I, Perdikis S, Al-Khodairy A, Corbet T, Schnider A, Schmidlin T, Zhang H, Bassolino M, Viceic D, Vuadens P, Guggisberg AG, Millan JDR. Brain-actuated functional electrical stimulation elicits lasting arm motor recovery after stroke. Nat Commun. 2018 Jun 20;9(1):2421. doi: 10.1038/s41467-018-04673-z.

    PubMed 29925890

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing EEG-based brain-computer interface, Functional Electrical Stimulation and Active hand orthosis in people with Stroke, Cerebrovascular and Hemiplegia and Hemiparesis, run by University of Essex at 1 site in Italy.

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 12 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 22 Dec 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 Italy. 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. Some participants in this study may receive a placebo. 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 Serafeim Perdikis, PhD (00447394404046, serafeim.perdikis@essex.ac.uk), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Fugl-Meyer Assessment - Upper Extremity (FMA-UE) (time frame: Pre-intervention (1-2 days before intervention onset), immediately post-intervention and 6-month follow-up (at least 6 months after the end of the 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 NCT06179745, which also lists 2 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 22 Dec 2023.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in