Monika Ehrensberger1, Daniel Simpson, Patrick Broderick, Catherine Blake, Frances Horgan, Paula Hickey, Joanne OʼReilly, Kenneth Monaghan. 1. From the Clinical Health & Nutrition Centre (CHANCE), Department of Life Sciences, Institute of Technology, Sligo, Ireland (ME, DS, PB, KM); Physiotherapy & Population Science, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland (CB); Faculty of Medicine & Health Sciences, Royal College of Surgeons Ireland, Dublin, Ireland (FH); and University Hospital, Sligo, Ireland (PH, JO).
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to investigate the feasibility and potential effectiveness of mirror-aided cross-education compared with cross-education alone in poststroke upper limb recovery. DESIGN: A pilot randomized controlled parallel group study was carried out. Thirty-two patients with chronic stroke followed a 4-wk isometric strength training program performed with the less-affected upper limb three times per week. Participants in the mirror and strength training group observed the reflection of the exercising arm in the mirror. Participants in the strength training only group exercised without a mirror entirely. Participant compliance, adverse effects, and suitability of outcome measures assessed feasibility. Effectiveness outcomes included maximal isometric strength measured with the Biodex Dynamometer, the Modified Ashworth Scale, and the Chedoke Arm and Hand Activity Inventory. RESULTS: Compliance was high with no adverse effects. The use of the Biodex Dynamometer must be reviewed. Mirror therapy did not augment the cross-education effect (P > 0.05) in patients with chronic stroke when training isometrically. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot trial established the feasibility of a randomized controlled trial comparing mirror-aided cross-education with cross-education alone for poststroke upper limb recovery. Mirror therapy did not augment cross-education when training isometrically. However, results indicate that the combination of interventions should be investigated further applying an altered training protocol.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to investigate the feasibility and potential effectiveness of mirror-aided cross-education compared with cross-education alone in poststroke upper limb recovery. DESIGN: A pilot randomized controlled parallel group study was carried out. Thirty-two patients with chronic stroke followed a 4-wk isometric strength training program performed with the less-affected upper limb three times per week. Participants in the mirror and strength training group observed the reflection of the exercising arm in the mirror. Participants in the strength training only group exercised without a mirror entirely. Participant compliance, adverse effects, and suitability of outcome measures assessed feasibility. Effectiveness outcomes included maximal isometric strength measured with the Biodex Dynamometer, the Modified Ashworth Scale, and the Chedoke Arm and Hand Activity Inventory. RESULTS: Compliance was high with no adverse effects. The use of the Biodex Dynamometer must be reviewed. Mirror therapy did not augment the cross-education effect (P > 0.05) in patients with chronic stroke when training isometrically. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot trial established the feasibility of a randomized controlled trial comparing mirror-aided cross-education with cross-education alone for poststroke upper limb recovery. Mirror therapy did not augment cross-education when training isometrically. However, results indicate that the combination of interventions should be investigated further applying an altered training protocol.