Literature DB >> 17270510

Robotic-assisted rehabilitation of the upper limb after acute stroke.

Stefano Masiero1, Andrea Celia, Giulio Rosati, Mario Armani.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether early therapy with a novel robotic device can reduce motor impairment and enhance functional recovery of poststroke patients with hemiparetic and hemiplegic upper limb.
DESIGN: A single-blind randomized controlled trial, with an 8-month follow-up.
SETTING: Neurologic department and rehabilitation hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-five patients with acute (< or =1 wk of onset), unilateral, ischemic embolic, or thrombotic stroke.
INTERVENTIONS: Patients of both groups received the same dose and length per day of standard poststroke multidisciplinary rehabilitation. Patients were randomly assigned to 2 groups. The experimental group (n=17) received additional early sensorimotor robotic training, 4 hours a week for 5 weeks; the control group (n=18) was exposed to the robotic device, 30 minutes a week, twice a week, but the exercises were performed with the unimpaired upper limb. Training by robot consisted of peripheral manipulation of the shoulder and elbow of the impaired limb, correlated with visual stimuli. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA) of upper-extremity function (shoulder/elbow and coordination and wrist/hand subsections) to measure each trained limb segment; the Medical Research Council (MRC) score to measure the strength of muscle force during 3 actions: shoulder abduction (MRC deltoid), elbow flexion (MRC biceps), and wrist flexion (MRC wrist flexors); the FIM instrument and its motor component; and the Trunk Control Test (TCT) and Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS).
RESULTS: Compared with the patients in the control group, the experimental group showed significant gains in motor impairment and functional recovery of the upper limb after robot therapy, as measured by the MRC deltoid (P< or =.05) and biceps (P<.05) scores, the FMA for the proximal upper arm (P<.05), the FIM instrument (P<.05), and the FIM motor score (P<.01); these gains were also sustained at the 3- and 8-month follow-up. The FMA and MRC wrist flexor test findings did not differ statistically either at the end of training or at the follow-up sessions. We found no significant differences in MAS and TCT in either group in any of the evaluations. No adverse effects occurred and the robotic approach was very well accepted.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients who received robotic therapy in addition to conventional therapy showed greater reductions in motor impairment and improvements in functional abilities. Robotic therapy may therefore effectively complement standard rehabilitation from the start, by providing therapeutic support for patients with poststroke plegic and paretic upper limb.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17270510     DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2006.10.032

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil        ISSN: 0003-9993            Impact factor:   3.966


  63 in total

1.  Primary sensory and motor cortex activities during voluntary and passive ankle mobilization by the SHADE orthosis.

Authors:  Simone Pittaccio; Filippo Zappasodi; Stefano Viscuso; Francesca Mastrolilli; Matilde Ercolani; Francesco Passarelli; Franco Molteni; Stefano Besseghini; Paolo Maria Rossini; Franca Tecchio
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 5.038

2.  Effect of combined low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and virtual reality training on upper limb function in subacute stroke: a double-blind randomized controlled trail.

Authors:  Chan-Juan Zheng; Wei-Jing Liao; Wen-Guang Xia
Journal:  J Huazhong Univ Sci Technolog Med Sci       Date:  2015-04-16

3.  Efficacy of Short-Term Robot-Assisted Rehabilitation in Patients With Hand Paralysis After Stroke: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Jorge H Villafañe; Giovanni Taveggia; Silvia Galeri; Luciano Bissolotti; Chiara Mullè; Grace Imperio; Kristin Valdes; Alberto Borboni; Stefano Negrini
Journal:  Hand (N Y)       Date:  2017-02-16

Review 4.  Effects of robot-assisted upper limb rehabilitation in stroke patients: a systematic review with meta-analysis.

Authors:  Rachele Bertani; Corrado Melegari; Maria C De Cola; Alessia Bramanti; Placido Bramanti; Rocco Salvatore Calabrò
Journal:  Neurol Sci       Date:  2017-05-24       Impact factor: 3.307

Review 5.  Robot-assisted Therapy in Stroke Rehabilitation.

Authors:  Won Hyuk Chang; Yun-Hee Kim
Journal:  J Stroke       Date:  2013-09-27       Impact factor: 6.967

6.  Non-pharmacological interventions for the improvement of post-stroke activities of daily living and disability amongst older stroke survivors: A systematic review.

Authors:  Carrie Stewart; Selvarani Subbarayan; Pamela Paton; Elliot Gemmell; Iosief Abraha; Phyo Kyaw Myint; Denis O'Mahony; Alfonso J Cruz-Jentoft; Antonio Cherubini; Roy L Soiza
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-10-04       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Robot-assisted upper and lower limb rehabilitation after stroke: walking and arm/hand function.

Authors:  Stefan Hesse; Jan Mehrholz; Cordula Werner
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2008-05-02       Impact factor: 5.594

8.  Raised corticomotor excitability of M1 forearm area following anodal tDCS is sustained during robotic wrist therapy in chronic stroke.

Authors:  D J Edwards; H I Krebs; A Rykman; J Zipse; G W Thickbroom; F L Mastaglia; A Pascual-Leone; B T Volpe
Journal:  Restor Neurol Neurosci       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 2.406

Review 9.  Technology-assisted training of arm-hand skills in stroke: concepts on reacquisition of motor control and therapist guidelines for rehabilitation technology design.

Authors:  Annick A A Timmermans; Henk A M Seelen; Richard D Willmann; Herman Kingma
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2009-01-20       Impact factor: 4.262

10.  Introducing a feedback training system for guided home rehabilitation.

Authors:  Fabian Kohler; Thomas Schmitz-Rode; Catherine Disselhorst-Klug
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2010-01-15       Impact factor: 4.262

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.