Cargando…

Impact of Intensive Gait Training With and Without Electromechanical Assistance in the Chronic Phase After Stroke–A Multi-Arm Randomized Controlled Trial With a 6 and 12 Months Follow Up

Introduction: Movement related impairments and limitations in walking are common long-term after stroke. This multi-arm randomized controlled trial explored the impact of training with an electromechanically assisted gait training (EAGT) system, i.e., the Hybrid Assistive Limb(®) (HAL), when integra...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Palmcrantz, Susanne, Wall, Anneli, Vreede, Katarina Skough, Lindberg, Påvel, Danielsson, Anna, Sunnerhagen, Katharina S., Häger, Charlotte K., Borg, Jörgen
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8100236/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33967683
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2021.660726
_version_ 1783688740369072128
author Palmcrantz, Susanne
Wall, Anneli
Vreede, Katarina Skough
Lindberg, Påvel
Danielsson, Anna
Sunnerhagen, Katharina S.
Häger, Charlotte K.
Borg, Jörgen
author_facet Palmcrantz, Susanne
Wall, Anneli
Vreede, Katarina Skough
Lindberg, Påvel
Danielsson, Anna
Sunnerhagen, Katharina S.
Häger, Charlotte K.
Borg, Jörgen
author_sort Palmcrantz, Susanne
collection PubMed
description Introduction: Movement related impairments and limitations in walking are common long-term after stroke. This multi-arm randomized controlled trial explored the impact of training with an electromechanically assisted gait training (EAGT) system, i.e., the Hybrid Assistive Limb(®) (HAL), when integrated with conventional rehabilitation focused on gait and mobility. Material and Methods: Participants, aged 18–70 years with lower extremity paresis but able to walk with manual support or supervision 1–10 years after stroke, were randomized to (A) HAL-training on a treadmill, combined with conventional rehabilitation interventions (HAL-group), or (B) conventional rehabilitation interventions only (Conventional group), 3 days/week for 6 weeks, or (C) no intervention (Control group). Participants in the Control group were interviewed weekly regarding their scheduled training. Primary outcome was endurance in walking quantified by the 6 Minute Walk Test (6MWT). A rater blinded to treatment allocation performed assessments pre- and post-intervention and at follow-ups at 6 and 12 months. Baseline assessment included the National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) and the Modified Ranking Scale (MRS). Secondary outcomes included the Fugl Meyer Assessment- Lower Extremity, 10 Meter Walk Test, Berg Balance Scale (BBS), Barthel Index (BI) and perceived mobility with the Stroke Impact Scale. Results: A total of 48 participants completed the intervention period. The HAL-group walked twice as far as the Conventional group during the intervention. Post-intervention, both groups exhibited improved 6 MWT results, while the Control group had declined. A significant improvement was only found in the Conventional group and when compared to the Control group (Tukey HSD p = 0.022), and not between the HAL group and Conventional group (Tukey HSD p = 0.258) or the HAL- group and the Control group (Tukey HSD p = 0.447). There was also a significant decline in the Conventional group from post-intervention to 6 months follow up (p = 0.043). The best fitting model to predict outcome included initial balance (BBS), followed by stroke severity (NIHSS), and dependence in activity and participation (BI and MRS). Conclusion: Intensive conventional gait training induced significant improvements long-term after stroke while integrating treadmill based EAGT had no additional value in this study sample. The results may support cost effective evidence-based interventions for gait training long-term after stroke and further development of EAGT. Trial registration: Published on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02545088) August 24, 2015.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8100236
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-81002362021-05-07 Impact of Intensive Gait Training With and Without Electromechanical Assistance in the Chronic Phase After Stroke–A Multi-Arm Randomized Controlled Trial With a 6 and 12 Months Follow Up Palmcrantz, Susanne Wall, Anneli Vreede, Katarina Skough Lindberg, Påvel Danielsson, Anna Sunnerhagen, Katharina S. Häger, Charlotte K. Borg, Jörgen Front Neurosci Neuroscience Introduction: Movement related impairments and limitations in walking are common long-term after stroke. This multi-arm randomized controlled trial explored the impact of training with an electromechanically assisted gait training (EAGT) system, i.e., the Hybrid Assistive Limb(®) (HAL), when integrated with conventional rehabilitation focused on gait and mobility. Material and Methods: Participants, aged 18–70 years with lower extremity paresis but able to walk with manual support or supervision 1–10 years after stroke, were randomized to (A) HAL-training on a treadmill, combined with conventional rehabilitation interventions (HAL-group), or (B) conventional rehabilitation interventions only (Conventional group), 3 days/week for 6 weeks, or (C) no intervention (Control group). Participants in the Control group were interviewed weekly regarding their scheduled training. Primary outcome was endurance in walking quantified by the 6 Minute Walk Test (6MWT). A rater blinded to treatment allocation performed assessments pre- and post-intervention and at follow-ups at 6 and 12 months. Baseline assessment included the National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) and the Modified Ranking Scale (MRS). Secondary outcomes included the Fugl Meyer Assessment- Lower Extremity, 10 Meter Walk Test, Berg Balance Scale (BBS), Barthel Index (BI) and perceived mobility with the Stroke Impact Scale. Results: A total of 48 participants completed the intervention period. The HAL-group walked twice as far as the Conventional group during the intervention. Post-intervention, both groups exhibited improved 6 MWT results, while the Control group had declined. A significant improvement was only found in the Conventional group and when compared to the Control group (Tukey HSD p = 0.022), and not between the HAL group and Conventional group (Tukey HSD p = 0.258) or the HAL- group and the Control group (Tukey HSD p = 0.447). There was also a significant decline in the Conventional group from post-intervention to 6 months follow up (p = 0.043). The best fitting model to predict outcome included initial balance (BBS), followed by stroke severity (NIHSS), and dependence in activity and participation (BI and MRS). Conclusion: Intensive conventional gait training induced significant improvements long-term after stroke while integrating treadmill based EAGT had no additional value in this study sample. The results may support cost effective evidence-based interventions for gait training long-term after stroke and further development of EAGT. Trial registration: Published on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02545088) August 24, 2015. Frontiers Media S.A. 2021-04-22 /pmc/articles/PMC8100236/ /pubmed/33967683 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2021.660726 Text en Copyright © 2021 Palmcrantz, Wall, Vreede, Lindberg, Danielsson, Sunnerhagen, Häger and Borg. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Neuroscience
Palmcrantz, Susanne
Wall, Anneli
Vreede, Katarina Skough
Lindberg, Påvel
Danielsson, Anna
Sunnerhagen, Katharina S.
Häger, Charlotte K.
Borg, Jörgen
Impact of Intensive Gait Training With and Without Electromechanical Assistance in the Chronic Phase After Stroke–A Multi-Arm Randomized Controlled Trial With a 6 and 12 Months Follow Up
title Impact of Intensive Gait Training With and Without Electromechanical Assistance in the Chronic Phase After Stroke–A Multi-Arm Randomized Controlled Trial With a 6 and 12 Months Follow Up
title_full Impact of Intensive Gait Training With and Without Electromechanical Assistance in the Chronic Phase After Stroke–A Multi-Arm Randomized Controlled Trial With a 6 and 12 Months Follow Up
title_fullStr Impact of Intensive Gait Training With and Without Electromechanical Assistance in the Chronic Phase After Stroke–A Multi-Arm Randomized Controlled Trial With a 6 and 12 Months Follow Up
title_full_unstemmed Impact of Intensive Gait Training With and Without Electromechanical Assistance in the Chronic Phase After Stroke–A Multi-Arm Randomized Controlled Trial With a 6 and 12 Months Follow Up
title_short Impact of Intensive Gait Training With and Without Electromechanical Assistance in the Chronic Phase After Stroke–A Multi-Arm Randomized Controlled Trial With a 6 and 12 Months Follow Up
title_sort impact of intensive gait training with and without electromechanical assistance in the chronic phase after stroke–a multi-arm randomized controlled trial with a 6 and 12 months follow up
topic Neuroscience
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8100236/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33967683
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2021.660726
work_keys_str_mv AT palmcrantzsusanne impactofintensivegaittrainingwithandwithoutelectromechanicalassistanceinthechronicphaseafterstrokeamultiarmrandomizedcontrolledtrialwitha6and12monthsfollowup
AT wallanneli impactofintensivegaittrainingwithandwithoutelectromechanicalassistanceinthechronicphaseafterstrokeamultiarmrandomizedcontrolledtrialwitha6and12monthsfollowup
AT vreedekatarinaskough impactofintensivegaittrainingwithandwithoutelectromechanicalassistanceinthechronicphaseafterstrokeamultiarmrandomizedcontrolledtrialwitha6and12monthsfollowup
AT lindbergpavel impactofintensivegaittrainingwithandwithoutelectromechanicalassistanceinthechronicphaseafterstrokeamultiarmrandomizedcontrolledtrialwitha6and12monthsfollowup
AT danielssonanna impactofintensivegaittrainingwithandwithoutelectromechanicalassistanceinthechronicphaseafterstrokeamultiarmrandomizedcontrolledtrialwitha6and12monthsfollowup
AT sunnerhagenkatharinas impactofintensivegaittrainingwithandwithoutelectromechanicalassistanceinthechronicphaseafterstrokeamultiarmrandomizedcontrolledtrialwitha6and12monthsfollowup
AT hagercharlottek impactofintensivegaittrainingwithandwithoutelectromechanicalassistanceinthechronicphaseafterstrokeamultiarmrandomizedcontrolledtrialwitha6and12monthsfollowup
AT borgjorgen impactofintensivegaittrainingwithandwithoutelectromechanicalassistanceinthechronicphaseafterstrokeamultiarmrandomizedcontrolledtrialwitha6and12monthsfollowup