Robotic and Conventional Hand Therapy After Stroke
Robot-assisted Hand Training (Amadeo) Compared With Conventional Physiotherapy Techniques in Chronic Ischemic Stroke Patients: A Pilot Study
1 other identifier
interventional
31
2 countries
2
Brief Summary
Weakness is a major cause of disability in stroke survivors. Rehabilitation techniques are often not effective in restoring full function of the upper limb. Specifically, many individuals remain with weakness in the hand, preventing its return to full use. Robotic therapies have been developed as exercise tools for stroke survivors. Devices, such as the InMotion2, have been shown to be useful in restoring some motor function in the upper limb. However, most existing devices designed to be used with the upper limb have primarily been developed to treat the shoulder, elbow and wrist. They have not specifically addressed hand function. Tyromotion, Inc. has developed the Amadeo, which is primarily intended to provide rehabilitation for patients with neurological or orthopedic deficits in hand function. Initial clinical testing has demonstrated the practicality of using this device in a population of stroke survivors, although further research is needed to better understand the usefulness of the Amadeo device as compared with conventional rehabilitation methods. The purpose of this study was to compare results of training with the Amadeo device or training with conventional therapies. A total of 28 subjects from two separate sites participated in the study and underwent baseline testing of upper limb motor and sensory performance and function. Subjects were then assigned to one of two treatment groups with a 50:50 chance of being in either group. One group underwent training with the Amadeo device and the other group underwent training with conventional therapy. All training sessions were 60 minutes in duration, three days/week for eight weeks (24 total sessions). Subjects were reassessed on completion of the training program.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P25-P50 for not_applicable stroke
Started Apr 2011
Longer than P75 for not_applicable stroke
2 active sites
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
Study Start
First participant enrolled
April 1, 2011
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
March 1, 2012
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
March 1, 2016
CompletedFirst Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
January 10, 2017
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
January 13, 2017
CompletedResults Posted
Study results publicly available
January 25, 2018
CompletedJanuary 25, 2018
January 1, 2018
11 months
January 10, 2017
January 17, 2017
January 23, 2018
Conditions
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (1)
Impairment Based Arm Measures - Change in Upper Extremity Portion of the Fugl Meyer
quantitative performance measure (scale ranging from 0 (minimum) to 66 (maximum) points) of arm and hand impairment. A higher score represents more skilled movements of the arm and hand.
Through study completion, an average of 8 weeks (at baseline and at the 8-week completion point)
Secondary Outcomes (7)
Change in Range of Motion Measures
Through study completion, an average of 8 weeks
Change in Hand and Pinch Strength
Through study completion, an average of 8 weeks
Change in Motor Activity Log Amount
Through study completion (taken at baseline and at 8-week study completion)
Change in Mobility and Activities of Daily Living
Through study completion (taken at baseline and at 8 week study completion)
Change in Hand Dexterity
Through study completion, an average of 8 weeks
- +2 more secondary outcomes
Study Arms (2)
Conventional Therapy
ACTIVE COMPARATORParticipants randomized to this arm will receive conventional based therapy to their affected upper limb dose matched with the Robotic Therapy group. These interventions are aimed at increasing range of motion, strength and function at the shoulder, elbow, wrist and hand.
Robotic Therapy
EXPERIMENTALParticipants randomized to this arm will receive robotic based therapy using the Amadeo Hand Robot device to improve range of motion, strength, and coordination to the wrist and hand.
Interventions
This is a robotic device designed to offer rehabilitation to remediate weakness and limitations of range of motion of the hand and fingers.
This arm involves treatment using conventional methods designed to promote range of motion, strength, coordination and function at the level of the shoulder, elbow, wrist and hand.
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- history of stroke (\>3 months from time of ictus)
- paresis or plegia of the upper extremity.
You may not qualify if:
- severe spasticity (defined on the Ashworth Scale with a score of 4-5)
- severe pain despite conventional pain therapy of the paretic upper extremity
- swelling, infection, fracture or ulcers of the paretic extremity
- arthritis of the hand joints
- pregnant
- botulinum toxin- therapy to the upper extremity within 3 months prior to study entry
- severe contractions
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
- Columbia Universitylead
- Medical University Innsbruckcollaborator
- New York Universitycollaborator
Study Sites (2)
Columbia University Medical Center
New York, New York, 10032, United States
Innsbruck Medical University
Innsbruck, 6020, Austria
MeSH Terms
Conditions
Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Results Point of Contact
- Title
- Lauri Bishop, PT, DPT Research Physical Therapist
- Organization
- Columbia University Medical Center/ Dept. of Rehabilitation & Regenerative Medicine
Study Officials
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
Joel Stein, MD
Columbia University
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
Raimund Helbok, MD
Innsbruck Medical University
Publication Agreements
- PI is Sponsor Employee
- No
- Restrictive Agreement
- No
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- not applicable
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- SINGLE
- Who Masked
- OUTCOMES ASSESSOR
- Purpose
- SUPPORTIVE CARE
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
- Responsible Party
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
- PI Title
- Department of Rehabilitation and Regenerative Medicine Chair
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
January 10, 2017
First Posted
January 13, 2017
Study Start
April 1, 2011
Primary Completion
March 1, 2012
Study Completion
March 1, 2016
Last Updated
January 25, 2018
Results First Posted
January 25, 2018
Record last verified: 2018-01
Data Sharing
- IPD Sharing
- Will not share