StrokeNCT06187974
Relationship of Proprioception, Reaction Time and the Gait and Balance Parameters After Stroke
An observational study of Stroke, run by University of Rzeszow at 1 site in Poland.
Trial summary
The aim of this observational study is to analyze how impaired proprioception affects the gait, reaction time, balance and functioning of stroke patients. Research questions: Are there correlations between the deficit of proprioception and reaction time and the parameters of gait and balance as well as the functional… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 30 to 75 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Stroke
- What is being tested?
- observation
- How many people
- 132 participants
- Where
- 1 sitePoland
- Study dates
- 8 Nov 2023to 31 Oct 2024
- Phase
- Observational
- 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 30 to 75 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Study population: stroke survivors up to 3 months after the stroke - patients reffered to the Department of Rehabilitation, Clinical Regional Hospital number 2 in Rzeszow, Poland (study group) and healthy volunteers matched for age and gender.
Who may be able to join
- informed and voluntary consent of the patient,
- first-time stroke,
- hemiparesis,
- time from stroke to 3 months,
- age 30-75,
- grade 3-5 in the Functional Ambulation Category,
- walking without orthopedic support.
Who cannot join
- lack of informed and voluntary consent of the patient,
- second or subsequent stroke,
- stroke of the brainstem and cerebellum,
- epilepsy,
- disorders of higher mental functions,
- coexisting neurological, rheumatological, orthopedic diseases,
- use of orthopedic supplies during locomotion.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Poland1 site
Department of Rehabilitation, Clinical Regional Hospital number 2
Rzeszów, Podkarpackie Voivodeship, 35-301
About this study
Official title: Assessment of the Relationship Between the Deficit of Proprioception, Reaction Time and the Parameters of Gait and Balance in Stroke Patients
The aim of this observational study is to analyze how impaired proprioception affects the gait, reaction time, balance and functioning of stroke patients.
Research questions:
Read more
- Are there correlations between the deficit of proprioception and reaction time and the parameters of gait and balance as well as the functional state of stroke patients?
- Are there relationships between factors such as proprioception, reaction time, balance, functional status and gait, and time since stroke, the hemisphere where the stroke occurred, and gender?
- Are there differences in proprioception deficits and reaction times between the lower limbs in stroke survivors?
Participants will be assessed once using standard functional clinical tests and the rehabilitation devices.
Researchers will compare stroke patients and healthy volunteers to see, if there are differences in proprioception deficits, reaction time and balance.
Read the detailed description
For this prospective observational study, ischemic - stroke survivors (study group) and healthy volunteers matched for age and gender (control group) will be recruited. Study procedures will be performed in the morning including one-time functional assessment of proprioception, gait, balance and reaction time using standard clinical tests (Timed Up and Go Test, sit to stand test, 10m walk test, Wisconsin scale, Berg scale, Ashworth scale, Brunstrom scale, Barthel Scale, Rankin scale and FAC) and rehabilitation devices (Luna EMG - proprioception assessment, Pablo - gait parameters assessment, Omego Plus - proprioception assessment, ALFA stabilometric platform - balance and reaction time assessment).
- Conditions
- Stroke
- Being tested
- observation
- Medical subject headings
- Stroke
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
observationOther
observation
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Study group | stroke patients Receives: Other: observation | |
| Control group | healthy volunteers Receives: Other: observation |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Correlation between the knee proprioception deficit (degree) and gait speed (m/s)
The knee proprioception deficit (degree) will be assessed by rehabilitation robot Luna EMG and gait speed (m/s) will be assessed using inertial sensors (Pablo device)
Measured: September 2024
Correlation between the knee proprioception deficit (degree) and gait time: 10-meter-Walk Test (seconds)
The knee proprioception deficit (degree) will be assessed by rehabilitation robot Luna EMG and gait time (seconds) will be assessed using inertial sensors (Pablo device)
Measured: September 2024
Correlation between the knee proprioception deficit (degree) and gait cycle (steps/minute)
The knee proprioception deficit (degree) will be assessed by rehabilitation robot Luna EMG and gait cycle (steps/minute) will be assessed using inertial sensors (Pablo device)
Measured: September 2024
Correlation between the knee proprioception deficit (degree) and cycle distance (cm)
The knee proprioception deficit (degree) will be assessed by rehabilitation robot Luna EMG and cycle distance (cm) will be assessed using inertial sensors (Pablo device)
Measured: September 2024
Correlation between the knee proprioception deficit (degree) and ambulation status: Functional Ambulation Category (points: minimum 0, maximum 5)
The knee proprioception deficit (degree) will be assessed by rehabilitation robot Luna EMG and the ambulation status will be assessed using standard clinical scale: Functional Ambulation Category. Less points indicate worse ambulation category
Measured: September 2024
Correlation between the knee proprioception deficit (degree) and kinematic and spatiotemporal gait parameters: Wisconsin scale (points: minimum 13.35, maximum 42)
The knee proprioception deficit (degree) will be assessed by rehabilitation robot Luna EMG and the kinematic and spatiotemporal gait parameters will be assessed using standard clinical scale: Wisconsin scale. The higher the score the more seriously affected the gait
Measured: September 2024
Correlation between the knee proprioception deficit (degree) and reaction time (miliseconds)
The knee proprioception deficit (degree) will be assessed by rehabilitation robot Luna EMG and the reaction time will be assessed using stabilometric platform (Alfa)
Measured: September 2024
Correlation between the knee proprioception deficit (degree) and balance parameter: lateral sways (cm)
The knee proprioception deficit (degree) will be assessed by rehabilitation robot Luna EMG and the lateral sways (cm) will be assessed using stabilometric platform (Alfa)
Measured: September 2024
Correlation between the knee proprioception deficit (degree) and balance parameter: anterior-posterior sways (cm)
The knee proprioception deficit (degree) will be assessed by rehabilitation robot Luna EMG and the anterior-posterior sways (cm) will be assessed using stabilometric platform (Alfa)
Measured: September 2024
Correlation between the knee proprioception deficit (degree) and balance parameter: path length (cm)
The knee proprioception deficit (degree) will be assessed by rehabilitation robot Luna EMG and the path length (cm) will be assessed using stabilometric platform (Alfa)
Measured: September 2024
Correlation between the knee proprioception deficit (degree) and balance parameter: lateral velocity (cm/s)
The knee proprioception deficit (degree) will be assessed by rehabilitation robot Luna EMG and the lateral velocity (cm/s) will be assessed using stabilometric platform (Alfa)
Measured: September 2024
Correlation between the knee proprioception deficit (degree) and balance parameter: anterio-posterior velocity (cm/s)
The knee proprioception deficit (degree) will be assessed by rehabilitation robot Luna EMG and the anterior-posterior velocity (cm/s) will be assessed using stabilometric platform (Alfa)
Measured: September 2024
Correlation between the knee proprioception deficit (degree) and balance parameter: COP area (cm2)
The knee proprioception deficit (degree) will be assessed by rehabilitation robot Luna EMG and the COP area (cm2) will be assessed using stabilometric platform (Alfa). COP - center of pressure
Measured: September 2024
Correlation between the knee proprioception deficit (degree) and balance: Berg Balance Scale (points: minimum 0, maximum 56)
The knee proprioception deficit (degree) will be assessed by rehabilitation robot Luna EMG and the balance will be assessed using standard clinical scale: Berg Balance Scale. Less points indicate worse balance
Measured: September 2024
Correlation between the knee proprioception deficit (degree) and dynamic balance: Timed Up and Go Test (seconds)
The knee proprioception deficit (degree) will be assessed by rehabilitation robot Luna EMG and the dynamic balance will be assessed using standard clinical scale Timed Up and Go Test. Longer time of performing test indicates worse dynamic balance
Measured: September 2024
Correlation between the knee proprioception deficit (degree) and functional status: 5 times Sit To Stand Test (seconds)
The knee proprioception deficit (degree) will be assessed by rehabilitation robot Luna EMG and the functional status will be assessed using standard clinical scale: 5 times Sit To Stand Test. Longer time of performing test indicates worse functional status
Measured: September 2024
Correlation between the knee proprioception deficit (degree) and spasticity: Modified Ashworth Scale (points: minimum 0, maximum 4)
The knee proprioception deficit (degree) will be assessed by rehabilitation robot Luna EMG and the spasticity will be assessed using standard clinical scale: Modified Ashworth Scale. Better score indicates worse spasticity
Measured: September 2024
Correlation between the knee proprioception deficit (degree) and functional status: Brunnstrom scale (points: minimum 1, maximum 6)
The knee proprioception deficit (degree) will be assessed by rehabilitation robot Luna EMG and the functional status will be assessed using standard clinical scale: Brunnstrom scale. Better score indicates better functional status
Measured: September 2024
Correlation between the knee proprioception deficit (degree) and functional status: Rankin scale (points: minimum 0, maximum 5)
The knee proprioception deficit (degree) will be assessed by rehabilitation robot Luna EMG and the functional status will be assessed using standard clinical scale: Rankin scale. Better score indicates worse functional status
Measured: September 2024
Correlation between the knee proprioception deficit (degree) and functional status: Barthel scale (points: minimum 0, maximum 100)
The knee proprioception deficit (degree) will be assessed by rehabilitation robot Luna EMG and the functional status will be assessed using standard clinical scale: Barthel. Better score indicates better functional status
Measured: September 2024
Secondary outcomes (21)
Differences in knee proprioception deficit (degree).
The knee proprioception deficit (degree) will be assessed by rehabilitation robot Luna EMG
Measured: December 2024
Differences in gait speed (m/s)
Gait speed will be assessed using inertial sensors (Pablo device)
Measured: December 2024
Differences in gait time: 10-meter-Walk Test (seconds)
Gait time will be assessed using inertial sensors (Pablo device)
Measured: December 2024
Differences in gait cycle (steps/minute)
Gait cycle will be assessed using inertial sensors (Pablo device)
Measured: December 2024
Differences in cycle distance (cm)
Cycle distance will be assessed using inertial sensors (Pablo device)
Measured: December 2024
Differences in ambulation status: Functional Ambulation Category (points: minimum 0, maximum 5)
The ambulation status will be assessed using standard clinical scale: Functional Ambulation Category. Less points indicate worse ambulation category
Measured: December 2024
Differences in kinematic and spatiotemporal gait parameters: Wisconsin scale (points: minimum 13.35, maximum 42)
The kinematic and spatiotemporal gait parameters will be assessed using standard clinical scale: Wisconsin scale. The higher the score the more seriously affected the gait
Measured: December 2024
Differences in reaction time (ms).
Reaction time will be assessed using stabilometric platform (Alfa)
Measured: December 2024
Differences in balance parameter: lateral sways (cm)
Lateral sways will be assessed using stabilometric platform (Alfa)
Measured: December 2024
Differences in balance parameter: anterior-posterior sways (cm)
Anterior-posterior sways will be assessed using stabilometric platform (Alfa)
Measured: December 2024
Differences in balance parameter: path length (cm)
Path length will be assessed using stabilometric platform (Alfa)
Measured: December 2024
Differences in balance parameter: lateral velocity (cm/s)
Lateral velocity will be assessed using stabilometric platform (Alfa)
Measured: December 2024
Differences in balance parameter: anterior-posterior velocity (cm/s)
Anterior-posterior velocity will be assessed using stabilometric platform (Alfa)
Measured: December 2024
Differences in balance parameter: COP area (cm2)
This balance parameter will be assessed using stabilometric platform (Alfa); COP - center of pressure
Measured: December 2024
Differences in balance: Berg Balance Scale (points: minimum 0, maximum 56)
Balance will be assessed using standard clinical scale: Berg Balance Scale. Less points indicate worse balance
Measured: December 2024
Differences in dynamic balance: Timed Up and Go Test (seconds)
Dynamic balance will be assessed using standard clinical scale Timed Up and Go Test. Longer time of performing test indicates worse dynamic balance
Measured: December 2024
Differences in functional status: 5 times Sit To Stand Test (seconds)
The functional status will be assessed using standard clinical scale: 5 times Sit To Stand Test. Longer time of performing test indicates worse functional status
Measured: December 2024
Differences in spasticity: Modified Ashworth Scale (points: minimum 0, maximum 4)
The spasticity will be assessed using standard clinical scale: Modified Ashworth Scale. Better score indicates worse spasticity
Measured: December 2024
Differences in functional status: Brunnstrom scale (points: minimum 1, maximum 6)
The functional status will be assessed using standard clinical scale: Brunnstrom scale. Better score indicates better functional status
Measured: December 2024
Differences in functional status: Rankin scale (points: minimum 0, maximum 5)
The functional status will be assessed using standard clinical scale: Rankin scale. Better score indicates worse functional status
Measured: December 2024
Differences in functional status: Barthel scale (points: minimum 0, maximum 100)
The functional status will be assessed using standard clinical scale: Barthel scale. Better score indicates better functional status
Measured: December 2024
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted3 Jan 2024
- Study start8 Nov 2023
- Primary completion31 Oct 2024
- Study completion31 Oct 2024
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- 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
- Case-control
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Enrolment
- 132 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Rzeszow
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Maciej Kochman, University of Rzeszow
- Investigators
- Maciej Kochman, Dr., Principal investigator, Institute of Health Sciences, College of Medical Sciences, University of Rzeszów
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06187974
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- Mkochman
- Status last verified
- Apr 2024
- First submitted
- 3 Jul 2023
- Last updated
- 7 May 2026
- Results posted
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Undecided
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 7 May 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Assessment of the Relationship Between the Deficit of Proprioception, Reaction Time and the Parameters of Gait and Balance in Stroke Patients
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06187974
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- Mkochman
- Conditions
- Stroke
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 132 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of RzeszowUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 8 Nov 2023 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 31 Oct 2024 (actual)
- Study completion
- 31 Oct 2024 (actual)
- First posted
- 3 Jan 2024 (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 aim of this observational study is to analyze how impaired proprioception affects the gait, reaction time, balance and functioning of stroke patients.
Research questions:
- Are there correlations between the deficit of proprioception and reaction time and the parameters of gait and balance as well as the functional state of stroke patients?
- Are there relationships between factors such as proprioception, reaction time, balance, functional status and gait, and time since stroke, the hemisphere where the stroke occurred, and gender?
- Are there differences in proprioception deficits and reaction times between the lower limbs in stroke survivors?
Participants will be assessed once using standard functional clinical tests and the rehabilitation devices.
Researchers will compare stroke patients and healthy volunteers to see, if there are differences in proprioception deficits, reaction time and balance.
Detailed description
For this prospective observational study, ischemic - stroke survivors (study group) and healthy volunteers matched for age and gender (control group) will be recruited. Study procedures will be performed in the morning including one-time functional assessment of proprioception, gait, balance and reaction time using standard clinical tests (Timed Up and Go Test, sit to stand test, 10m walk test, Wisconsin scale, Berg scale, Ashworth scale, Brunstrom scale, Barthel Scale, Rankin scale and FAC) and rehabilitation devices (Luna EMG - proprioception assessment, Pablo - gait parameters assessment, Omego Plus - proprioception assessment, ALFA stabilometric platform - balance and reaction time assessment).
Study design
- Observational model
- Case-control
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Study group | – | Other: observationstroke patients |
| Control group | – | Other: observationhealthy volunteers |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 30 to 75 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- stroke survivors up to 3 months after the stroke - patients reffered to the Department of Rehabilitation, Clinical Regional Hospital number 2 in Rzeszow, Poland (study group) and healthy volunteers matched for age and gender.
Key inclusion criteria (7 listed)
- informed and voluntary consent of the patient,
- first-time stroke,
- hemiparesis,
- time from stroke to 3 months,
- age 30-75,
Key exclusion criteria (7 listed)
- lack of informed and voluntary consent of the patient,
- second or subsequent stroke,
- stroke of the brainstem and cerebellum,
- epilepsy,
- disorders of higher mental functions,
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 |
|---|---|---|
| observationobservation | Other | Control group, Study group |
Primary outcome
Correlation between the knee proprioception deficit (degree) and gait speed (m/s)
Time frame: September 2024
The knee proprioception deficit (degree) will be assessed by rehabilitation robot Luna EMG and gait speed (m/s) will be assessed using inertial sensors (Pablo device)
Correlation between the knee proprioception deficit (degree) and gait time: 10-meter-Walk Test (seconds)
Time frame: September 2024
The knee proprioception deficit (degree) will be assessed by rehabilitation robot Luna EMG and gait time (seconds) will be assessed using inertial sensors (Pablo device)
Correlation between the knee proprioception deficit (degree) and gait cycle (steps/minute)
Time frame: September 2024
The knee proprioception deficit (degree) will be assessed by rehabilitation robot Luna EMG and gait cycle (steps/minute) will be assessed using inertial sensors (Pablo device)
Correlation between the knee proprioception deficit (degree) and cycle distance (cm)
Time frame: September 2024
The knee proprioception deficit (degree) will be assessed by rehabilitation robot Luna EMG and cycle distance (cm) will be assessed using inertial sensors (Pablo device)
Correlation between the knee proprioception deficit (degree) and ambulation status: Functional Ambulation Category (points: minimum 0, maximum 5)
Time frame: September 2024
The knee proprioception deficit (degree) will be assessed by rehabilitation robot Luna EMG and the ambulation status will be assessed using standard clinical scale: Functional Ambulation Category. Less points indicate worse ambulation category
Correlation between the knee proprioception deficit (degree) and kinematic and spatiotemporal gait parameters: Wisconsin scale (points: minimum 13.35, maximum 42)
Time frame: September 2024
The knee proprioception deficit (degree) will be assessed by rehabilitation robot Luna EMG and the kinematic and spatiotemporal gait parameters will be assessed using standard clinical scale: Wisconsin scale. The higher the score the more seriously affected the gait
Correlation between the knee proprioception deficit (degree) and reaction time (miliseconds)
Time frame: September 2024
The knee proprioception deficit (degree) will be assessed by rehabilitation robot Luna EMG and the reaction time will be assessed using stabilometric platform (Alfa)
Correlation between the knee proprioception deficit (degree) and balance parameter: lateral sways (cm)
Time frame: September 2024
The knee proprioception deficit (degree) will be assessed by rehabilitation robot Luna EMG and the lateral sways (cm) will be assessed using stabilometric platform (Alfa)
Correlation between the knee proprioception deficit (degree) and balance parameter: anterior-posterior sways (cm)
Time frame: September 2024
The knee proprioception deficit (degree) will be assessed by rehabilitation robot Luna EMG and the anterior-posterior sways (cm) will be assessed using stabilometric platform (Alfa)
Correlation between the knee proprioception deficit (degree) and balance parameter: path length (cm)
Time frame: September 2024
The knee proprioception deficit (degree) will be assessed by rehabilitation robot Luna EMG and the path length (cm) will be assessed using stabilometric platform (Alfa)
Correlation between the knee proprioception deficit (degree) and balance parameter: lateral velocity (cm/s)
Time frame: September 2024
The knee proprioception deficit (degree) will be assessed by rehabilitation robot Luna EMG and the lateral velocity (cm/s) will be assessed using stabilometric platform (Alfa)
Correlation between the knee proprioception deficit (degree) and balance parameter: anterio-posterior velocity (cm/s)
Time frame: September 2024
The knee proprioception deficit (degree) will be assessed by rehabilitation robot Luna EMG and the anterior-posterior velocity (cm/s) will be assessed using stabilometric platform (Alfa)
Correlation between the knee proprioception deficit (degree) and balance parameter: COP area (cm2)
Time frame: September 2024
The knee proprioception deficit (degree) will be assessed by rehabilitation robot Luna EMG and the COP area (cm2) will be assessed using stabilometric platform (Alfa). COP - center of pressure
Correlation between the knee proprioception deficit (degree) and balance: Berg Balance Scale (points: minimum 0, maximum 56)
Time frame: September 2024
The knee proprioception deficit (degree) will be assessed by rehabilitation robot Luna EMG and the balance will be assessed using standard clinical scale: Berg Balance Scale. Less points indicate worse balance
Correlation between the knee proprioception deficit (degree) and dynamic balance: Timed Up and Go Test (seconds)
Time frame: September 2024
The knee proprioception deficit (degree) will be assessed by rehabilitation robot Luna EMG and the dynamic balance will be assessed using standard clinical scale Timed Up and Go Test. Longer time of performing test indicates worse dynamic balance
Correlation between the knee proprioception deficit (degree) and functional status: 5 times Sit To Stand Test (seconds)
Time frame: September 2024
The knee proprioception deficit (degree) will be assessed by rehabilitation robot Luna EMG and the functional status will be assessed using standard clinical scale: 5 times Sit To Stand Test. Longer time of performing test indicates worse functional status
Correlation between the knee proprioception deficit (degree) and spasticity: Modified Ashworth Scale (points: minimum 0, maximum 4)
Time frame: September 2024
The knee proprioception deficit (degree) will be assessed by rehabilitation robot Luna EMG and the spasticity will be assessed using standard clinical scale: Modified Ashworth Scale. Better score indicates worse spasticity
Correlation between the knee proprioception deficit (degree) and functional status: Brunnstrom scale (points: minimum 1, maximum 6)
Time frame: September 2024
The knee proprioception deficit (degree) will be assessed by rehabilitation robot Luna EMG and the functional status will be assessed using standard clinical scale: Brunnstrom scale. Better score indicates better functional status
Correlation between the knee proprioception deficit (degree) and functional status: Rankin scale (points: minimum 0, maximum 5)
Time frame: September 2024
The knee proprioception deficit (degree) will be assessed by rehabilitation robot Luna EMG and the functional status will be assessed using standard clinical scale: Rankin scale. Better score indicates worse functional status
Correlation between the knee proprioception deficit (degree) and functional status: Barthel scale (points: minimum 0, maximum 100)
Time frame: September 2024
The knee proprioception deficit (degree) will be assessed by rehabilitation robot Luna EMG and the functional status will be assessed using standard clinical scale: Barthel. Better score indicates better functional status
21 secondary outcomes
Differences in knee proprioception deficit (degree).
Time frame: December 2024
Differences in gait speed (m/s)
Time frame: December 2024
Differences in gait time: 10-meter-Walk Test (seconds)
Time frame: December 2024
Differences in gait cycle (steps/minute)
Time frame: December 2024
Differences in cycle distance (cm)
Time frame: December 2024
Differences in ambulation status: Functional Ambulation Category (points: minimum 0, maximum 5)
Time frame: December 2024
Differences in kinematic and spatiotemporal gait parameters: Wisconsin scale (points: minimum 13.35, maximum 42)
Time frame: December 2024
Differences in reaction time (ms).
Time frame: December 2024
Differences in balance parameter: lateral sways (cm)
Time frame: December 2024
Differences in balance parameter: anterior-posterior sways (cm)
Time frame: December 2024
Differences in balance parameter: path length (cm)
Time frame: December 2024
Differences in balance parameter: lateral velocity (cm/s)
Time frame: December 2024
Differences in balance parameter: anterior-posterior velocity (cm/s)
Time frame: December 2024
Differences in balance parameter: COP area (cm2)
Time frame: December 2024
Differences in balance: Berg Balance Scale (points: minimum 0, maximum 56)
Time frame: December 2024
Differences in dynamic balance: Timed Up and Go Test (seconds)
Time frame: December 2024
Differences in functional status: 5 times Sit To Stand Test (seconds)
Time frame: December 2024
Differences in spasticity: Modified Ashworth Scale (points: minimum 0, maximum 4)
Time frame: December 2024
Differences in functional status: Brunnstrom scale (points: minimum 1, maximum 6)
Time frame: December 2024
Differences in functional status: Rankin scale (points: minimum 0, maximum 5)
Time frame: December 2024
Differences in functional status: Barthel scale (points: minimum 0, maximum 100)
Time frame: December 2024
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 7 May 2026.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Undecided
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.
Maciej Kochman, Dr. principal investigator
Institute of Health Sciences, College of Medical Sciences, University of Rzeszów
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 Rzeszow at 1 site in Poland.
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 7 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 7 May 2026. 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 Poland. 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?
Correlation between the knee proprioception deficit (degree) and gait speed (m/s) (time frame: September 2024). The study lists 20 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
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 7 May 2026; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 8 Nov 2026.