Mirror Therapy for Hand Function Recovery in Acute Stroke

NCT07204067 | Recruiting DMC

• 1 other identifier: RIPHAH-REC Sapna Kursheed
• Study Type: interventional
• Target: 44
• Locations: 1 country
• Sites: 1

Brief Summary

Randomized controlled trial to determine whether mirror therapy (MT), added to conventional physiotherapy, improves upper-limb motor recovery, hand function, spasticity, and range of motion (ROM) in acute stroke compared with conventional physiotherapy alone. Outcomes include ARAT, Motor Assessment Scale, Modified Ashworth Scale, and goniometric ROM.

Conditions

Acute Stroke

Keywords

Mirror Therapy Acute Stroke

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

• Upper-Limb Function (ARAT total score, 0-57)

  Change from baseline to end of week 1; higher scores = better function.

  6 Months

Secondary Outcomes (1)

• Motor Function (Motor Assessment Scale - relevant upper-limb items, 0-6 per item)

  6months

Other Outcomes (2)

• Spasticity (Modified Ashworth Scale, 0-4)

  6 months

• Range of Motion (Goniometric AROM at shoulder, elbow, wrist, finger joints; degrees)

  6 months

Study Arms (2)

Mirror Therapy + Conventional Physiotherapy

EXPERIMENTAL

Experimental: Mirror Therapy + Conventional Physiotherapy Device/Procedure: Mirror Therapy (20 min/session) + immediate Conventional Physiotherapy (20 min/session) Schedule: 2 sessions/week for 1 week (total: 2 sessions) MT Procedure: Mirror (box or plain) placed along mid-sagittal plane reflecting the non-paretic limb while hiding the paretic limb. Participants perform bilateral symmetrical movements focusing on the mirror image (e.g., wrist flex/ext, finger flex/ext, elbow flex/ext, reaching \& grasping). Conventional Content (immediately after MT): strengthening \& functional task practice (e.g., reaching/transfers), plus targeted hand training: theraputty squeezes, finger extension with rubber band, towel wringing, lifting small objects, reaching overhead/side-to-side with weight, weighted ball toss/catch.

Behavioral: Mirror Therapy Conventional Physiotherapy

Conventional Physiotherapy Only

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

Procedure: Conventional Physiotherapy (20 min/session), no mirror. Same schedule and exercise menu as above without visual mirror feedback. Notes: The proposal specifies 1 week duration with 2 sessions/week, 20 min each; centers may extend to clinically standard dosage via protocol amendment if needed.

Behavioral: Mirror Therapy Conventional Physiotherapy

Interventions

Mirror Therapy Conventional Physiotherapy BEHAVIORAL

Experimental: Mirror Therapy + Conventional Physiotherapy Mirror therapy performed 20 min/session, 2 sessions/week for 1 week. A mirror is placed midsagittal, reflecting the non-paretic limb while hiding the paretic limb. Patients perform bilateral movements (wrist, finger, elbow flex/extension; reaching/grasping) while focusing on the mirror image. This is followed by 20 min of conventional physiotherapy, including strengthening, functional tasks, theraputty squeezes, finger extension with rubber band, towel wringing, lifting small objects, overhead reaching, and ball toss. Active Comparator: Conventional Physiotherapy Only Conventional physiotherapy 20 min/session, 2 sessions/week for 1 week. Exercises include upper limb strengthening, functional task practice, theraputty squeezes, finger extension with rubber band, towel wringing, lifting small objects, overhead reaching, and ball toss.

Also known as: intervention for stroke

Conventional Physiotherapy Only; Mirror Therapy + Conventional Physiotherapy

Eligibility Criteria

• Age: 40 Years - 55 Years
• Sex: all
• Healthy Volunteers: No
• Age Groups: Adult (18-64)

You may qualify if:

• Age 40-55 years
• Acute ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke within the last 1 month
• Unilateral hemiparesis/hemiplegia
• Medically stable and cleared for rehabilitation
• Able to follow verbal instructions; MMSE ≥ 24
• Provides written informed consent

You may not qualify if:

• Recurrent stroke or bilateral involvement
• Severe cognitive impairment (MMSE \< 24)
• Visual field deficits, unilateral neglect, or severe aphasia interfering with MT
• Other neurological disorders (e.g., Parkinson's, MS)
• Orthopedic conditions affecting upper limb/trunk
• Uncontrolled cardio-respiratory disease limiting exercise
• Severe spasticity (MAS ≥ 3) in affected limb
• Concurrent enrollment in other interventional trials
• Inability/refusal to consent

Sponsors & Collaborators

• Riphah International University: lead

Study Sites (1)

Riphah international University Malakand Campus

Malakand, KPK, 23060, Pakistan

RECRUITING

MeSH Terms

Conditions

Stroke

Interventions

Methods

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Cerebrovascular Disorders; Brain Diseases; Central Nervous System Diseases; Nervous System Diseases; Vascular Diseases; Cardiovascular Diseases

Intervention Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Investigative Techniques

Study Officials

• Dr.Nadeem Ahmad, MS

  Riphah International University

  PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Central Study Contacts

Dr.Nadeem Ahmad, MS

CONTACT

03451915105; n.ahmad@riphah.edu.pk

Dr.Nadeem Ahmad, MS

CONTACT

03028367237; drnadeem765@gmail.com

Study Design

• Study Type: interventional
• Phase: not applicable
• Allocation: RANDOMIZED
• Masking: SINGLE
• Who Masked: PARTICIPANT
• Masking Details: None (Open Label)
• Purpose: HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH
• Intervention Model: PARALLEL
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: SPONSOR

Model Details: Parallel Assignment (2 arms)

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: September 25, 2025
• First Posted: October 2, 2025
• Study Start: August 15, 2025
• Primary Completion (Estimated): August 17, 2027
• Study Completion (Estimated): September 17, 2027
• Last Updated: October 2, 2025

Record last verified: 2025-09

Data Sharing

• IPD Sharing: Will not share

Locations

PA (1)