Efficacy of Unilateral Versus Bilateral Approach to Robot-Assisted Rehabilitation on Motor Control/Performance, Daily Functions, and Physiological Responses in Patients With Subacute Stroke
Efficacy of Unilateral Versus Bilateral Approach to Robot-Assisted Rehabilitation on Motor Control/Performance, Daily Functions, and Physiological Responses in Patients With Subacute Stroke
Robot-assisted training (RT) devices developed to date have a significant impact on stroke rehabilitation. Several research groups have developed the robotic devices and examined their efficacy on improving UL function after stroke. All these robotic devices have been applied in stroke rehabilitation and their efficacy are evaluated, but the scientific evidence for the mechanisms of RT-induced recovery, the relative treatment effects of unilateral vs bilateral robotic trainings, and the impact on physiological responses is still lacking.
The primary purposes of this study are to examine (1) the relative immediate treatment effects of unilateral vs bilateral RT on motor impairments/performance and daily functions in patients with subacute stroke; (2) the long-term benefits of unilateral vs bilateral RT by conducting a 6-month follow up evaluation; and (3) the effects of RT on movement reorganization as well as on the physiological markers of inflammation, oxidative stress, erythrocyte deformability, and blood glucose. These overall findings will help better understanding of the efficacy of RT on functional outcomes, movement reorganization, and physiological markers. The investigators would additionally explore the possible differential treatment effects in patients with different levels of motor severity (i.e., moderate vs. severe).
The investigators hypothesize that (1) both unilateral (the InMotion3) and bilateral (the Bi-Manu-Track) robot-assisted training would bring larger benefits on motor performance and daily function than the control treatment; (2) such benefits would retain during the follow-up; (3) there would be differential immediate and retention effects of unilateral (the InMotion3) and bilateral (the Bi-Manu-Track) robot-assisted training on different outcome measures; (4) better movement reorganization as well as physiological marker expressions would be found in both robotic groups compared to control group; and (5) there would be differential effects of robotic therapy between participants with moderate vs. severe motor impairment.
Subacute stroke participants will be recruited from the Chang Gung Memorial Hospital and then were randomly assigned to 1 of the 3 groups: RT with the InMotion3 (unilateral) robot group, RT with the Bi-Manu-Track (bilateral) robot group, and conventional intervention group.
Assessments on motor impairments/performance (Fugl Mayer Assessment, Modified Ashworth Scale, MyotonePRO, Medical Research Council scale, Jamar dynamometer, and Action Research Arm Test) and daily functions (Motor Activity Log, ABILHAND Questionnaire, accelerometer, and Adelaide Activities Profile) take about 40 minutes to complete. Kinematic evaluation will take about 1 hour. Blood samples of the patients (12 ml.) will be collected to examine the physiological markers (ie, inflammation-related markers, oxidative stress markers, erythrocyte deformability, and blood glucose) before and after intervention. A total of 24 ml blood will be collected in this study. Except for the blood taking, all the examinations are non-invasive.
Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA), controlling for the pretest differences, will be separately performed for each outcome measure to test the effects of different intervention groups.
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Kwei-Shan, Tao-Yuan 333, Taiwan