BACKGROUND: Although bilateral arm training (BAT) has been widely studied, the comparative effects of therapist-based BAT (TBAT) versus robot-assisted BAT (RBAT) remains unknown. OBJECTIVE: This study compared the efficacy of TBAT, RBAT, and a control treatment (CT) on motor control, functional performance, and quality of life after chronic stroke. DESIGN: A randomized, pretest-posttest, control group design was used. METHODS:Forty-two patients (mean age=54.49 years, SD=9.69; mean length of time since stroke onset=17.62 months, SD=10.50) were randomly assigned to TBAT, RBAT, and CT groups. Each group received treatment for 90 to 105 minutes per session, 5 sessions on weekdays, for 4 weeks. Outcome measures included kinematic analyses, the Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA), the Motor Activity Log, and the Stroke Impact Scale (SIS). RESULTS: Large and significant effects were found in the kinematic variables, distal part of upper-limb motor impairment, and certain aspects of quality of life in favor of TBAT or RBAT. Specifically, the TBAT group demonstrated significantly better temporal efficiency and smoothness, straighter trunk motion, and less trunk compensation compared with the CT and RBAT groups. The RBAT group had increased shoulder flexion compared with the CT and TBAT groups. On the FMA, the TBAT group showed higher distal part scores than the CT group. On the SIS, the RBAT group had better strength subscale, physical function domain, and total scores than the CT group. Limitations This study recruited patients with mild spasticity and without cognitive impairment. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with CT, TBAT and RBAT exhibited differential effects on outcome measures. Therapist-based BAT may improve temporal efficiency, smoothness, trunk control, and motor impairment of the distal upper limb. Robot-assisted BAT may improve shoulder flexion and quality of life.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Although bilateral arm training (BAT) has been widely studied, the comparative effects of therapist-based BAT (TBAT) versus robot-assisted BAT (RBAT) remains unknown. OBJECTIVE: This study compared the efficacy of TBAT, RBAT, and a control treatment (CT) on motor control, functional performance, and quality of life after chronic stroke. DESIGN: A randomized, pretest-posttest, control group design was used. METHODS: Forty-two patients (mean age=54.49 years, SD=9.69; mean length of time since stroke onset=17.62 months, SD=10.50) were randomly assigned to TBAT, RBAT, and CT groups. Each group received treatment for 90 to 105 minutes per session, 5 sessions on weekdays, for 4 weeks. Outcome measures included kinematic analyses, the Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA), the Motor Activity Log, and the Stroke Impact Scale (SIS). RESULTS: Large and significant effects were found in the kinematic variables, distal part of upper-limb motor impairment, and certain aspects of quality of life in favor of TBAT or RBAT. Specifically, the TBAT group demonstrated significantly better temporal efficiency and smoothness, straighter trunk motion, and less trunk compensation compared with the CT and RBAT groups. The RBAT group had increased shoulder flexion compared with the CT and TBAT groups. On the FMA, the TBAT group showed higher distal part scores than the CT group. On the SIS, the RBAT group had better strength subscale, physical function domain, and total scores than the CT group. Limitations This study recruited patients with mild spasticity and without cognitive impairment. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with CT, TBAT and RBAT exhibited differential effects on outcome measures. Therapist-based BAT may improve temporal efficiency, smoothness, trunk control, and motor impairment of the distal upper limb. Robot-assisted BAT may improve shoulder flexion and quality of life.
Authors: Fernanda M R M Ferreira; Maria Emília A Chaves; Vinícius C Oliveira; Jordana S R Martins; Claysson B S Vimieiro; Adriana M V N Van Petten Journal: Occup Ther Int Date: 2021-07-31 Impact factor: 1.448