Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 Jan 25:9:13.
doi: 10.3389/fneur.2018.00013. eCollection 2018.

Encouragement-Induced Real-World Upper Limb Use after Stroke by a Tracking and Feedback Device: A Study Protocol for a Multi-Center, Assessor-Blinded, Randomized Controlled Trial

Affiliations

Encouragement-Induced Real-World Upper Limb Use after Stroke by a Tracking and Feedback Device: A Study Protocol for a Multi-Center, Assessor-Blinded, Randomized Controlled Trial

Jeremia P O Held et al. Front Neurol. .

Abstract

Introduction: Retraining the paretic upper limb after stroke should be intense and specific to be effective. Hence, the best training is daily life use, which is often limited by motivation and effort. Tracking and feedback technology have the potential to encourage self-administered, context-specific training of upper limb use in the patients' home environment. The aim of this study is to investigate post-intervention and long-term effects of a wrist-worn activity tracking device providing multimodal feedback on daily arm use in hemiparetic subjects beyond 3 months post-stroke.

Methods and analysis: A prospective, multi-center, assessor-blinded, Phase 2 randomized controlled trial with a superiority framework. Sixty-two stroke patients will be randomized in two groups with a 1:1 allocation ratio, stratified based on arm paresis severity (Fugl-Meyer Assessment-Upper Extremity subscale <32 and ≥32). The experimental group receives a wrist-worn activity tracking device providing multimodal feedback on daily arm use for 6 weeks. Controls wear an identical device providing no feedback. Sample size: 31 participants per group, based on a difference of 0.75±1.00 points on the Motor Activity Log-14 Item Version, Amount of Use subscale (MAL-14 AOU), 80% power, two-sided alpha of 0.05, and a 10% attrition rate. Outcomes: primary outcome is the change in patient-reported amount of daily life upper limb use (MAL-14 AOU) from baseline to post-intervention. Secondary outcomes are change in upper limb motor function, upper limb capacity, global disability, patient-reported quality of daily life upper limb use, and quality of life from baseline to post-intervention and 6-week follow-up, as well as compliance, activity counts, and safety.

Discussion: The results of this study will show the possible efficacy of a wrist-worn tracking and feedback device on patient-reported amount of daily life upper limb use.

Ethics and dissemination: The study is approved by the Cantonal Ethics Committees Zurich, and Northwest and Central Switzerland (BASEC-number 2017-00948) and registered in https://clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03294187) before recruitment started. This study will be carried out in compliance with the Declaration of Helsinki, ICH-GCP, ISO 14155:2011, and Swiss legal and regulatory requirements. Dissemination will include submission to a peer-reviewed journal, patient and healthcare professional magazines, and congress presentations.

Keywords: daily life; feedback; movement sensor; rehabilitation; stroke; upper limb.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Participant time line. Legend: R, randomization; T0, baseline assessment; T1, post-intervention assessment; T2, follow-up assessment.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Investigational devices. Legend: (A) motion tracker “ARYS™ me|tracker”, black-silver tracker; (B) “ARYS™ pro|tracker healthy”, black-brown tracker; (C) accessory charging station “ARYS™|tracker charger”; (D) android smartphone with the pre-installed application “ARYS™ me|app,” here displaying the history of today’s Arm Activities, including provided reminders.
Figure 3
Figure 3
“Tree of Recovery.” Legend: a figurative representation of the amount of upper limb use in daily life. Arm Activities are displayed in blue numbers and the earned diamonds in red.

References

    1. Murray CJ, Barber RM, Foreman KJ, Abbasoglu Ozgoren A, Abd-Allah F, Abera SF, et al. Global, regional, and national disability-adjusted life years (DALYS) for 306 diseases and injuries and healthy life expectancy (HALE) for 188 countries, 1990-2013: quantifying the epidemiological transition. Lancet (2015) 386:2145–91.10.1016/s0140-6736(15)61340-x - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Feigin VL, Krishnamurthi RV, Parmar P, Norrving B, Mensah GA, Bennett DA, et al. Update on the global burden of ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke in 1990-2013: the GBD 2013 Study. Neuroepidemiology (2015) 45:161–76.10.1159/000441085 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Pang MY, Harris JE, Eng JJ. A community-based upper-extremity group exercise program improves motor function and performance of functional activities in chronic stroke: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil (2006) 87:1–9.10.1016/j.apmr.2005.08.113 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Langhorne P, Coupar F, Pollock A. Motor recovery after stroke: a systematic review. Lancet Neurol (2009) 8:741–54.10.1016/s1474-4422(09)70150-4 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Jorgensen HS, Nakayama H, Raaschou HO, Vive-Larsen J, Stoier M, Olsen TS. Outcome and time course of recovery in stroke. Part II: time course of recovery. The Copenhagen Stroke Study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil (1995) 76:406–12.10.1016/S0003-9993(95)80567-2 - DOI - PubMed

Associated data