Cargando…

ArmAssist Robotic System versus Matched Conventional Therapy for Poststroke Upper Limb Rehabilitation: A Randomized Clinical Trial

The ArmAssist is a simple low-cost robotic system for upper limb motor training that combines known benefits of repetitive task-oriented training, greater intensity of practice, and less dependence on therapist assistance. The aim of this preliminary study was to compare the efficacy of ArmAssist (A...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tomić, Tijana J. Dimkić, Savić, Andrej M., Vidaković, Aleksandra S., Rodić, Sindi Z., Isaković, Milica S., Rodríguez-de-Pablo, Cristina, Keller, Thierry, Konstantinović, Ljubica M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5306984/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28251157
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2017/7659893
_version_ 1782507286765240320
author Tomić, Tijana J. Dimkić
Savić, Andrej M.
Vidaković, Aleksandra S.
Rodić, Sindi Z.
Isaković, Milica S.
Rodríguez-de-Pablo, Cristina
Keller, Thierry
Konstantinović, Ljubica M.
author_facet Tomić, Tijana J. Dimkić
Savić, Andrej M.
Vidaković, Aleksandra S.
Rodić, Sindi Z.
Isaković, Milica S.
Rodríguez-de-Pablo, Cristina
Keller, Thierry
Konstantinović, Ljubica M.
author_sort Tomić, Tijana J. Dimkić
collection PubMed
description The ArmAssist is a simple low-cost robotic system for upper limb motor training that combines known benefits of repetitive task-oriented training, greater intensity of practice, and less dependence on therapist assistance. The aim of this preliminary study was to compare the efficacy of ArmAssist (AA) robotic training against matched conventional arm training in subacute stroke subjects with moderate-to-severe upper limb impairment. Twenty-six subjects were enrolled within 3 months of stroke and randomly assigned to the AA group or Control group (n = 13 each). Both groups were trained 5 days per week for 3 weeks. The primary outcome measure was Fugl-Meyer Assessment-Upper Extremity (FMA-UE) motor score, and the secondary outcomes were Wolf Motor Function Test-Functional Ability Scale (WMFT-FAS) and Barthel index (BI). The AA group, in comparison to the Control group, showed significantly greater increases in FMA-UE score (18.0 ± 9.4 versus 7.5 ± 5.5, p = 0.002) and WMFT-FAS score (14.1 ± 7.9 versus 6.7 ± 7.8, p = 0.025) after 3 weeks of treatment, whereas the increase in BI was not significant (21.2 ± 24.8 versus 13.1 ± 10.7, p = 0.292). There were no adverse events. We conclude that arm training using the AA robotic device is safe and able to reduce motor deficits more effectively than matched conventional arm training in subacute phase of stroke. The study has been registered at the ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT02729649.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5306984
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Hindawi Publishing Corporation
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-53069842017-03-01 ArmAssist Robotic System versus Matched Conventional Therapy for Poststroke Upper Limb Rehabilitation: A Randomized Clinical Trial Tomić, Tijana J. Dimkić Savić, Andrej M. Vidaković, Aleksandra S. Rodić, Sindi Z. Isaković, Milica S. Rodríguez-de-Pablo, Cristina Keller, Thierry Konstantinović, Ljubica M. Biomed Res Int Clinical Study The ArmAssist is a simple low-cost robotic system for upper limb motor training that combines known benefits of repetitive task-oriented training, greater intensity of practice, and less dependence on therapist assistance. The aim of this preliminary study was to compare the efficacy of ArmAssist (AA) robotic training against matched conventional arm training in subacute stroke subjects with moderate-to-severe upper limb impairment. Twenty-six subjects were enrolled within 3 months of stroke and randomly assigned to the AA group or Control group (n = 13 each). Both groups were trained 5 days per week for 3 weeks. The primary outcome measure was Fugl-Meyer Assessment-Upper Extremity (FMA-UE) motor score, and the secondary outcomes were Wolf Motor Function Test-Functional Ability Scale (WMFT-FAS) and Barthel index (BI). The AA group, in comparison to the Control group, showed significantly greater increases in FMA-UE score (18.0 ± 9.4 versus 7.5 ± 5.5, p = 0.002) and WMFT-FAS score (14.1 ± 7.9 versus 6.7 ± 7.8, p = 0.025) after 3 weeks of treatment, whereas the increase in BI was not significant (21.2 ± 24.8 versus 13.1 ± 10.7, p = 0.292). There were no adverse events. We conclude that arm training using the AA robotic device is safe and able to reduce motor deficits more effectively than matched conventional arm training in subacute phase of stroke. The study has been registered at the ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT02729649. Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2017 2017-01-31 /pmc/articles/PMC5306984/ /pubmed/28251157 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2017/7659893 Text en Copyright © 2017 Tijana J. Dimkić Tomić et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Clinical Study
Tomić, Tijana J. Dimkić
Savić, Andrej M.
Vidaković, Aleksandra S.
Rodić, Sindi Z.
Isaković, Milica S.
Rodríguez-de-Pablo, Cristina
Keller, Thierry
Konstantinović, Ljubica M.
ArmAssist Robotic System versus Matched Conventional Therapy for Poststroke Upper Limb Rehabilitation: A Randomized Clinical Trial
title ArmAssist Robotic System versus Matched Conventional Therapy for Poststroke Upper Limb Rehabilitation: A Randomized Clinical Trial
title_full ArmAssist Robotic System versus Matched Conventional Therapy for Poststroke Upper Limb Rehabilitation: A Randomized Clinical Trial
title_fullStr ArmAssist Robotic System versus Matched Conventional Therapy for Poststroke Upper Limb Rehabilitation: A Randomized Clinical Trial
title_full_unstemmed ArmAssist Robotic System versus Matched Conventional Therapy for Poststroke Upper Limb Rehabilitation: A Randomized Clinical Trial
title_short ArmAssist Robotic System versus Matched Conventional Therapy for Poststroke Upper Limb Rehabilitation: A Randomized Clinical Trial
title_sort armassist robotic system versus matched conventional therapy for poststroke upper limb rehabilitation: a randomized clinical trial
topic Clinical Study
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5306984/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28251157
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2017/7659893
work_keys_str_mv AT tomictijanajdimkic armassistroboticsystemversusmatchedconventionaltherapyforpoststrokeupperlimbrehabilitationarandomizedclinicaltrial
AT savicandrejm armassistroboticsystemversusmatchedconventionaltherapyforpoststrokeupperlimbrehabilitationarandomizedclinicaltrial
AT vidakovicaleksandras armassistroboticsystemversusmatchedconventionaltherapyforpoststrokeupperlimbrehabilitationarandomizedclinicaltrial
AT rodicsindiz armassistroboticsystemversusmatchedconventionaltherapyforpoststrokeupperlimbrehabilitationarandomizedclinicaltrial
AT isakovicmilicas armassistroboticsystemversusmatchedconventionaltherapyforpoststrokeupperlimbrehabilitationarandomizedclinicaltrial
AT rodriguezdepablocristina armassistroboticsystemversusmatchedconventionaltherapyforpoststrokeupperlimbrehabilitationarandomizedclinicaltrial
AT kellerthierry armassistroboticsystemversusmatchedconventionaltherapyforpoststrokeupperlimbrehabilitationarandomizedclinicaltrial
AT konstantinovicljubicam armassistroboticsystemversusmatchedconventionaltherapyforpoststrokeupperlimbrehabilitationarandomizedclinicaltrial