pper limb training after stroke (ULTRA-stroke): Contrasting the clinical effects and underlying mechanisms of unilateral and bilateral training
- Conditions
- CVAstroke10042258
- Registration Number
- NL-OMON33953
- Lead Sponsor
- Vrije Universiteit
- Brief Summary
Not available
- Detailed Description
Not available
Recruitment & Eligibility
- Status
- Pending
- Sex
- Not specified
- Target Recruitment
- 60
Inclusion Criteria
First ever ischemic or hemorrhagic subacute stroke in one of the hemispheres, verified by CT and/or MRI;
upper limb deficit, yet able to execute 1) >10 dgrees extension/abduction of the thumb, 2) >10 degrees extension in two additional digits, 3) >10 degrees wrist extension; less than 53 points on the Action Research Arm Test; 18-80 years of age; motivated to participate; give written or oral informed consent
Exclusion Criteria
Suffer from upper extremity orthopeadic limitations that may affect the results; not being able to communicate (<4 points on the Utrecht Commincation Observation); disoriented with regard to time and place (<24 points on the Mini Mental State Examination); pacemaker or other metalic implants (only for MEG)
Study & Design
- Study Type
- Interventional
- Study Design
- Not specified
- Primary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method <p>The Action Research Arm Test (ARAT) serves as primary outcome measure. This is<br /><br>a valid, reliable, and responsive performance test (van der Lee et al., 2001)<br /><br>of the ability to perform gross movements and to grasp, move and release<br /><br>objects differing in size, weight and shape (Lyle, 1981). The minimal<br /><br>clinically important difference is set at about 10% of the scale*s range, i.e.<br /><br>6 points (Van der Lee et al., 1999); improvement by > 10 points is defined as<br /><br>return of dexterity (Kwakkel et al., 2003).</p><br>
- Secondary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method