Skip to main content
Clinical Trials/NCT04749199
NCT04749199
Unknown
Not Applicable

Enhanced Mirror Therapy for Improving Brain Reorganization and Function in Stroke: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial With Economic Evaluation

The Hong Kong Polytechnic University0 sites30 target enrollmentMay 1, 2021
ConditionsStroke

Overview

Phase
Not Applicable
Intervention
Not specified
Conditions
Stroke
Sponsor
The Hong Kong Polytechnic University
Enrollment
30
Primary Endpoint
Blood oxygenated haemoglobin concentrations
Last Updated
5 years ago

Overview

Brief Summary

This research aims to test the methodological procedures and obtain preliminary results regarding the therapeutic and cost-effectiveness of enhanced mirror therapy relative to standard mirror therapy for improving brain reorganization and upper limb function in individuals with stroke.

Detailed Description

Stroke is among the leading causes of mortality and disability, worldwide. Muscle weakness and other complications associated with stroke can result in decreased quality of life and significant declines in the activities of daily living. Mirror therapy has been shown to have a moderate effect, facilitating the functional recovery among individuals who have experienced a stroke. A prototype for a computerized, mirror therapy device was developed and found to be feasible. Recently, the investigators published a critical review and an activation likelihood estimation (ALE) meta-analysis analysing the widespread reports of brain activity associated with mirror therapy. Observations using functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) to evaluate a group of people with stroke (n = 14) and healthy volunteers (n = 18) revealed that performing complex tasks during the mirror therapy paradigm enhanced top-down motor facilitation in the ipsilesional/ipsilateral hemisphere relative to the moving limb. An important next step in this series of studies is to evaluate the training effects associated with the performance of complex tasks during mirror therapy among stroke patients, using the designed computerized mirror therapy device to deliver the enhanced mirror therapy training. The results of this study will help the investigators to understand the underlying mechanisms through which mirror therapy facilitates motor rehabilitation and will add to the body of literature describing the best, evidence-based practices for mirror therapy during stroke rehabilitation. The investigators propose a pilot study (n = 30) to test the methodological procedures and obtain preliminary results for a fully powered, randomized, controlled trial (RCT), combined with economic evaluation, to compare the therapeutic and cost-effectiveness between standard mirror therapy and enhanced (complex task and blurred image) mirror therapy.

Registry
clinicaltrials.gov
Start Date
May 1, 2021
End Date
November 1, 2022
Last Updated
5 years ago
Study Type
Interventional
Study Design
Parallel
Sex
All

Investigators

Responsible Party
Principal Investigator
Principal Investigator

Stanley John Winser

Assistant Professor

The Hong Kong Polytechnic University

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

  • adults with stroke (40-75 years old), with normal or corrected-to-normal vision and hearing;
  • post-stroke duration of ≥ 6 months, before the start of data collection;
  • no severe deficits in memory, communication, or the ability to understand verbal instructions.

Exclusion Criteria

  • participants with recurrent stroke; and
  • those who score \< 24 on the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE).

Outcomes

Primary Outcomes

Blood oxygenated haemoglobin concentrations

Time Frame: Change in score at the end of 4-weeks of intervention (T1), and six months post-intervention (T2)

Functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) will be used to assess neurovascular changes (blood oxygenated haemoglobin concentrations) in the M1. Higher the score obtained indicate better facilitation of the primary motor cortex.

Secondary Outcomes

  • Wrist and hand function(Change in score at the end of 4-weeks of intervention (T1), and six months post-intervention (T2))
  • Upper limb function(Change in score at the end of 4-weeks of intervention (T1), and six months post-intervention (T2))
  • Economic evaluation(Change in score at the end of 4-weeks of intervention (T1), and six months post-intervention (T2))

Similar Trials