Can Upper Limb Robotic Rehabilitation Plus Muscle Vibration Improve Motor Function? A Pilot Study
Overview
- Phase
- Not Applicable
- Intervention
- Not specified
- Conditions
- Stroke
- Sponsor
- IRCCS Centro Neurolesi "Bonino-Pulejo"
- Enrollment
- 20
- Primary Endpoint
- Assessment of spasticity-MAS
- Status
- Completed
- Last Updated
- 9 years ago
Overview
Brief Summary
Muscle vibration (MV) has been suggested as a useful non-pharmacological approach to control spasticity. Armeo Power® (AP) is a robotic exoskeleton for rehabilitation allowing early rehabilitation treatment. The objective of our study was to determine whether AP training coupled with MV applied on antagonist muscles of the spastic upper limb (UL) can reduce the spasticity of agonist muscles. We enrolled 20 chronic post-stroke patients, who underwent 40 daily sessions of AP training. Ten subjects (group-A) received muscle MV (on triceps brachii, deltoid, and supraspinatus), whereas the other 10 (group-B) underwent a sham vibration.
Investigators
Rocco Salvatore Calabrò
Principal investigator
IRCCS Centro Neurolesi "Bonino-Pulejo"
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria
- •a first ever supra-tentorial unilateral (left hemisphere) ischemic stroke experienced more than three months before the enrollment;
- •a deficit of shoulder abductor, arm flexor, and elbow extensor muscles ranging from 2 to 4 on the Medical Research Council scale (MRC);
- •a spasticity of biceps brachii (BB), pectoralis major (PM), and latissimus dorsi (LD) (namely, spastic agonist muscles) ranging from 1+ to 3 on the Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS);
- •age between 50 and 80 years; and (v) Caucasian ethnicity.
Exclusion Criteria
- •history of concomitant neurodegenerative diseases or brain surgery;
- •severe cognitive (Mini-Mental State Examination score \<23 points) or language impairment (Boston Disability Aphasia Quotient \<4/5);
- •severe neglect (Catherine Bergego Scale \>15/30);
- •systemic, bone, or joint disorders, tumors, changes in either central or peripheral sensitivity as well as visual impairments able to interfere with the aims and methods of the research;.(v) concomitant use of drugs for spasticity;
- •botulin toxin treatment in the last eight months;.(vii) TMS contraindications;
- •history of psychosis;
- •limited passive range of motion (shoulder abduction \<60°, elbow extension \<30°, specified by a goniometric assessment).
Outcomes
Primary Outcomes
Assessment of spasticity-MAS
Time Frame: Six months
The primary outcomes consisted in the effects of MV and Armeo Power® on spasticity by a clinical (MAS from spastic agonist muscles causing arm adduction, inward rotation, and flexion, and forearm flexion)
Secondary Outcomes
- Fugl-Meyer Assessment of UL motor recovery after stroke -FMA(Six months)