Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Upper limb deficits usually remain in 75% of the stroke survivors despite completing full rehabilitation. This is due to lack of effectiveness of rehabilitation and the degree of support and resources available.
In this study, the investigators plan to study the use of assistive technologies in chronic stroke survivors.
Assistive technologies have shown promising results in immediate improvement in functional abilities.
RELab tenoexo is a fully wearable and portable robotic hand orthoses (RHO) used for functional training. Its design support end users with functional hand opening and closing and can be applied in therapy exercises or during functional activities. While prior research demonstrated its effectiveness for spinal cord injury, it hasn't been tailored for multi-ethnic stroke populations.
This study aims to determine the feasibility and extent to which the RELab tenoexo can complement therapy training in clinic and further be used as both a training and assistive device in the home environment. In addition, it also aims to investigate the amount of upper limb usage before, during and after the training period.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| RELab tenoexo | Experimental | 3 weeks in clinic training (9 training sessions, two clinical assessment and 2 usability evaluations) followed by 2 weeks home training (1-hour daily training and to the extent participants desire). Lastly 1-month follow up clinical assessment and IMU data collection. |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RELab tenoexo | Device | The RELab tenoexo is a fully wearable and portable RHO developed at the Rehabilitation Engineering Laboratory (RELab) at ETH Zurich. |
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Action Research Arm Test (ARAT) Score | Functional and dexterity score in the affected arm evaluated using 19 tests of motor function across 4 subsets; minimum score = 0, maximum score = 57, with higher score indicating better function. | Week 2 (baseline), 4 (end of in-clinic training) ,8 (end of home training) ,12 (follow-up assessment) |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Fugl-Meyer Motor Assessment (FMA) scale | Change in Fugl Meyer Motor Assessment score in the affected arm, minimum: 0, maximum: 66 with higher scores indicating greater levels of mobility function | Week 2 (baseline), 4 (end of in-clinic training) ,8 (end of home training) ,12 (follow-up assessment) |
| Grip Strength (kg) |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS) | Measures the level of spasticity at the elbow and finger flexors of proximal interphalangeal joint regions; scored from "0 to 4" with "4" indicating affected part is more spastic in flexion/extension. | Week 2 (baseline), 4 (end of in-clinic training) ,8 (end of home training) ,12 (follow-up assessment) |
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Role | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Megan Lau | Contact | 68894580 | megan_se_lau@ttsh.com.sg |
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Tegan Plunkett | Tan Tock Seng Hospital | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tan Tock Seng Hospital | Recruiting | Singapore | Singapore | Singapore |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 40842028 | Derived | Tanczak N, Plunkett TK, Lin S, Kuenzler L, Lau M, Kuah WKC, Ng CY, Gassert R, Chua K, Lambercy O. Feasibility of post-stroke hand rehabilitation supported by a soft robotic hand orthosis in-clinic and at-home. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2025 Aug 21;22(1):183. doi: 10.1186/s12984-025-01717-6. |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D020521 | Stroke |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D002561 | Cerebrovascular Disorders |
| D001927 | Brain Diseases |
| D002493 | Central Nervous System Diseases |
| D009422 | Nervous System Diseases |
Not provided
Not provided
Single site, pilot, feasibility study that focuses on the transition of technology use from the clinic to home environment.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Measured by Digital hand-held Dynamometer (mean of 3 readings) for both hands |
| Week 2 (baseline), 4 (end of in-clinic training) ,8 (end of home training) ,12 (follow-up assessment) |
| Hr-QOL scales using SS-QOL (Stroke specific Quality of Life scale) | Quality of life scale specific to stroke patients, minimum 49, maximum 245; with higher scores indicating better function. | Week 2 (baseline), 4 (end of in-clinic training) ,8 (end of home training) ,12 (follow-up assessment) |
| EQ-5D-5L scale | Standardized measure of health-related quality of life using a 5 level scale (no problem, slight problems, moderate problems, severe problems, unable to) | Week 2 (baseline), 4 (end of in-clinic training) ,8 (end of home training) ,12 (follow-up assessment) |
| Self-efficacy outcomes by UPSET (upper limb self-efficacy test) | Questionnaire to measure self-efficacy in various tasks after stroke | Week 2 (baseline), 4 (end of in-clinic training) ,8 (end of home training) ,12 (follow-up assessment) |
| System Usability Scale (SUS) | To assess the overall usability of the tenoexo (effectiveness, efficiency, satisfaction), scaled from 1 (Strongly disagree) to 5 (Strongly Agree) | Week 3 (mid in-clinic training), 4 (end of in-clinic training), 8 (end of home training) |
| Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology (QUEST) | To evaluate user satisfaction with assistive technology, scaled from 1 (Not satisfied at all) to 5 (Very satisfied) | Week 3 (mid in-clinic training), 4 (end of in-clinic training), 8 (end of home training) |
| Visual Analogue Scale (self-reported pain score) |
Unidimensional measure of pain intensity; "0" being no pain and "10" being worst pain. |
| Week 2 (baseline), 4 (end of in-clinic training) ,8 (end of home training) ,12 (follow-up assessment) |
| D014652 | Vascular Diseases |
| D002318 | Cardiovascular Diseases |