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
Clinical Trial
. 2021 Jan 11;18(1):6.
doi: 10.1186/s12984-020-00792-1.

Behavioral and neurophysiological effects of an intensified robot-assisted therapy in subacute stroke: a case control study

Aida Sehle  1 , Jana Stuerner  1 , Thomas Hassa  1 , Stefan Spiteri  1 , Mircea A Schoenfeld  2   3   4 , Joachim Liepert  5
Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Behavioral and neurophysiological effects of an intensified robot-assisted therapy in subacute stroke: a case control study

Aida Sehle et al. J Neuroeng Rehabil. .

Abstract

Background: Physical training is able to induce changes at neurophysiological and behavioral level associated with performance changes for the trained movements. The current study explores the effects of an additional intense robot-assisted upper extremity training on functional outcome and motor excitability in subacute stroke patients.

Methods: Thirty moderately to severely affected patients < 3 months after stroke received a conventional inpatient rehabilitation. Based on a case-control principle 15 patients were assigned to receive additional 45 min of robot-assisted therapy (Armeo®Spring) 5 times per week (n = 15, intervention group, IG). The Fugl-Meyer Assessment for the Upper Extremity (FMA-UE) was chosen as primary outcome parameter. Patients were tested before and after a 3-week treatment period as well as after a follow-up period of 2 weeks. Using transcranial magnetic stimulation motor evoked potentials (MEPs) and cortical silent periods were recorded from the deltoid muscle on both sides before and after the intervention period to study effects at neurophysiological level. Statistical analysis was performed with non-parametric tests. Correlation analysis was done with Spearman´s rank correlation co-efficient.

Results: Both groups showed a significant improvement in FMA-UE from pre to post (IG: + 10.6 points, control group (CG): + 7.3 points) and from post to follow-up (IG: + 3.9 points, CG: + 3.3 points) without a significant difference between them. However, at neurophysiological level post-intervention MEP amplitudes were significantly larger in the IG but not in the CG. The observed MEP amplitudes changes were positively correlated with FMA-UE changes and with the total amount of robot-assisted therapy.

Conclusion: The additional robot-assisted therapy induced stronger excitability increases in the intervention group. However, this effect did not transduce to motor performance improvements at behavioral level. Trial registration The trial was registered in German Clinical Trials Register.

Clinical trial registration number: DRKS00015083. Registration date: September 4th, 2018. https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00015083 . Registration was done retrospectively.

Keywords: Dose–response relationship; Motor recovery; Robotics; Stroke; Transcranial magnetic stimulation; Upper extremity.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Chart flow of patient recruitment and participation
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Changes of the Fugl-Meyer Assessment for Upper Extremity (FMA-UE) for both groups and three measurement times. Mean values and ± 1 standard error are displayed
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Correlation between the changes of MEP amplitudes during pre-innervation on the paretic side and the degree of clinical improvement. MEP, motor evoked potentials; mV, millivolt; FMA-UE, Fugl-Meyer Assessment for Upper Extremity
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Rathore SS, Hinn AR, Cooper LS, Tyroler HA, Rosamond WD. Characterization of incident stroke signs and symptoms: findings from the atherosclerosis risk in communities study. Stroke. 2002;33(11):2718–2721. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.0000035286.87503.31. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Hatem SM, Saussez G, Della Faille M, et al. Rehabilitation of motor function after stroke: a multiple systematic review focused on techniques to stimulate upper extremity recovery. Front Hum Neurosci. 2016;10:442. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00442. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Veerbeek JM, van Wegen E, van Peppen R, et al. What is the evidence for physical therapy poststroke? A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS ONE. 2014;9(2):e87987. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0087987. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lin IH, Tsai HT, Wang CY, Hsu CY, Liou TH, Lin YN. Effectiveness and superiority of rehabilitative treatments in enhancing motor recovery within 6 months poststroke: a systemic review. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2019;100(2):366–378. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2018.09.123. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Mehrholz J, Pohl M, Platz T, Kugler J, Elsner B. Electromechanical and robot-assisted arm training for improving activities of daily living, arm function, and arm muscle strength after stroke. Cochrane Database System Rev. 2018 doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006876.pub5. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data