Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Trials
Published in: Trials 1/2023

Open Access 01-12-2023 | Stroke | Study protocol

Effects of a remote-handling-concept–based task-oriented arm training (ReHab-TOAT) on arm-hand skill performance in chronic stroke: a study protocol for a two-armed randomized controlled trial

Authors: Jule Elmanowski, Henk Seelen, Richard Geers, Melanie Kleynen, Jeanine Verbunt

Published in: Trials | Issue 1/2023

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Improving arm-hand skill performance is a major therapeutic target in stroke rehabilitation and needs intensive and varied training. However, guided treatment time is limited. Technology can assist in the training of patients, offering a higher intensity and more variety in content. A new task-oriented arm training approach was developed, using a ‘Remote Handling concept based’ device to provide haptic feedback during the performance of daily living activities (ReHab-TOAT). This study aims to investigate the effects of ReHab-TOAT on patients’ arm-hand function and arm-hand skill performance, quality of life of both patients in the chronic phase after stroke and their caregivers and the patients’ perception regarding the usability of the intervention.

Methods

A randomized clinical trial was designed. Adult chronic stroke patients suffering from hemiparesis and arm-hand problems, with an Utrechtse Arm-hand Test score of 1–3, will be invited to participate. Participants in the experimental group receive ReHab-TOAT additional to care as usual. ReHab-TOAT contains task-oriented arm training for stroke patients in combination with haptic feedback, generated by a remote handling device. They will train for 4 weeks, 3× per week, 1.5h per day. Participants in the control group will receive no additional therapy apart from care as usual. The Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA), measuring participants’ motor performance of the affected arm, is used as the primary outcome measure. Secondary outcome measures are arm-hand capacity of the patient (ARAT), perceived arm-hand skill performance (MAL), actual arm-hand skill performance (accelerometry), patients’ quality of life (EuoQol-5D) and caregivers’ quality of life (CarerQoL). Participants’ perception regarding the usability of the intervention, including both the developed approach and technology used, will be evaluated by the System Usability Scale and a questionnaire on the user experience of technology. Measurements will be performed at 1, 2, 3 and 4 weeks pre-intervention (baseline); immediately post-intervention; and 3, 6 and 9 months post-intervention. Statistical analysis includes linear mixed model analysis.

Discussion

This study is designed to investigate the evidence regarding the effects of ReHab-TOAT on patients’ performance at different levels of the International Classification of Functioning, disability and health (ICF) model, i.e. a framework measuring functioning and disability in relation to a health condition, and to provide insights on a successful development and research process regarding technology-assisted training in co-creation.

Trial registration

Netherlands Trial Register NL9541. Registered on June 22, 2021
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Kwakkel G, Kollen BJ, van der Grond J, Prevo AJ. Probability of regaining dexterity in the flaccid upper limb: impact of severity of paresis and time since onset in acute stroke. Stroke. 2003;34(9):2181–6.PubMedCrossRef
2.
Nakayama H, Jorgensen HS, Raaschou HO, Olsen TS. Recovery of upper extremity function in stroke patients: the Copenhagen Stroke Study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1994;75(4):394–8.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Demain S, Wiles R, Roberts L, McPherson K. Recovery plateau following stroke: fact or fiction? Disabil Rehabil. 2006;28(13-14):815–21.PubMedCrossRef
4.
Page SJ, Gater DR, Bach YRP. Reconsidering the motor recovery plateau in stroke rehabilitation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004;85(8):1377–81.PubMedCrossRef
5.
WHO. International classification of functioning, disability and health. 2001.
6.
World_Health_Organization. Towards a common language for functioning, disability and health: ICF. Geneva; 2002.
7.
Timmermans A, Seelen H, Kingma H, editors. Task-oriented training: an essential element in technology-supported rehabilitation of skilled arm-hand performance after stroke. IEEE-EMBS Benelux Chapter Symposium; 2009 November 9-10, 2009; Twente, the Netherlands.
8.
Timmermans AA, Seelen HA, Willmann RD, Bakx W, de Ruyter B, Lanfermann G, et al. Arm and hand skills: training preferences after stroke. Disabil Rehabil. 2009;31(16):1344–52.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Timmermans AA, Seelen HA, Willmann RD, Kingma H. Technology-assisted training of arm-hand skills in stroke: concepts on reacquisition of motor control and therapist guidelines for rehabilitation technology design. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2009;6:1.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
10.
Veerbeek J, van Wegen E, van Peppen R, Hendriks H, Rietberg M, van der Wees P, et al. KNGF-richtlijn Beroerte 2014. Available from: www.​kngfrichtlijnen.​nl. Retrieved January 22, 2023.
11.
Whitall J. Stroke rehabilitation research: time to answer more specific questions? Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2004;18(1):3–8 author reply 9-11.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Timmermans AAA, Geers RPJ, Franck JA, Dobbelsteijn P, Spooren AIF, Kingma H, et al. editors. T-TOAT: a method of task-oriented arm training for stroke patients suitable for implementation of exercises in rehabilitation technology. IEEE 11th International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics; 2009; Kyoto International Conference Center. Japan.
13.
Timmermans AAA, Spooren AIF, Kingma H, Seelen HAM. Influence of task-oriented training content on skilled arm-hand performance in stroke: a systematic review of non-CIMT trials. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2010;24(9):858–70.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Hubbard IJ, Parsons MW, Neilson C, Carey LM. Task-specific training: evidence for and translation to clinical practice. Occup Ther Int. 2009;16(3-4):175–89.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Arya KN, Verma R, Garg RK, Sharma VP, Agarwal M, Aggarwal GG. Meaningful task-specific training (MTST) for stroke rehabilitation: a randomized controlled trial. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2012;19(3):193–211.PubMedCrossRef
16.
Waddel K, Strube M, Bailey R, Klaesner J, Birkenmeier R, Dromerick A, et al. Does task-specific training improve upper limb performance in daily life post-stroke? Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2017;31(3):290–300.CrossRef
17.
Magill R. Motor learning and control, concepts and applications. 8th ed. New York: The McGraw-Hill Companies; 2007.
18.
Schmidt RA, Lee TD. Motor control and learning: a behavioral emphasis. 5th ed. Champaign: Human Kinetics; 2011.
19.
20.
21.
22.
Vahdat S, Darainy M, Milner TE, Ostry DJ. Functionally specific changes in resting-state sensorimotor networks after motor learning. J Neurosci. 2011;31(47):16907–15.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
23.
Magill RA. Chapter 11: defining and assessing learning. Motor learning and control. 9th Edition ed. New York: Mc Graw Hill; 2011. p. 248–64.
24.
Schmidt RA, Lee TD. Motor control and learning. A behavioral emphasis. 4th Edition ed. Champaign: Human Kinetics; 2005. p. 536.
25.
Pascual-Leone A, Amedi A, Fregni F, Merabet LB. The plastic human brain cortex. Ann Rev Neurosci. 2005;28:377–401.PubMedCrossRef
26.
Teasell R, Bayona N, Salter K, Hellings C, Bitensky J. Progress in clinical neurosciences: stroke recovery and rehabilitation. Can J Neurol Sci. 2006;33(4):357–64.PubMedCrossRef
27.
Teasell R, Foley N, Bhogal S, Bagg S, Jutai J. Evidence-based practice and setting basic standards for stroke rehabilitation in Canada. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2006;13(3):59–65.PubMedCrossRef
28.
Woldag H, Hummelsheim H. Evidence-based physiotherapeutic concepts for improving arm and hand function in stroke patients: a review. J Neurol. 2002;249(5):518–28.PubMedCrossRef
29.
Fisher BE, Sullivan KJ. Activity-dependent factors affecting poststroke functional outcomes. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2001;8(3):31–44.PubMedCrossRef
30.
Kwakkel G, Kollen B, Wagenaar R. Therapy impact on functional recovery in stroke rehabilitation: a critical view of the literature. Physiother. 1999;13:457.
31.
32.
Darling WG, Pizzimenti MA, Rotella DL, Hynes SM, Ge J, Stilwell-Morecraft KS, et al. Minimal forced use without constraint stimulates spontaneous use of the impaired upper extremity following motor cortex injury. Exp Brain Res. 2010;202(3):529–42.
33.
34.
Bach-y-Rita P. Theoretical and practical considerations in the restoration of function after stroke. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2001;8(3):1–15.PubMedCrossRef
35.
Bach-y-Rita P, Wood S, Leder R, Paredes O, Bahr D, Bach-y-Rita E, et al. Rehabilitation for institutional, home, and educational late stroke programs. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2002;8(4):1–10.PubMedCrossRef
36.
Timmermans AAA, Seelen HAM, Geers RPJ, Saini PK, Winter S, Te Vrugt J, et al. Sensor-based skill training in chronic stroke patients: results on treatment outcome, patient motivation and system usability. IEEE Trans Neur Sys Rehabil Eng. 2010;18(3):284–92.CrossRef
37.
Kruitwagen-van Reenen ET, Post MW, Mulder-Bouwens K, Visser-Meily JM. A simple bedside test for upper extremity impairment after stroke: validation of the Utrecht Arm/Hand Test. Disabil Rehabil. 2009;31(16):1338–43.PubMedCrossRef
38.
Franck JA, Smeets R, Seelen HAM. Changes in actual arm-hand use in stroke patients during and after clinical rehabilitation involving a well-defined arm-hand rehabilitation program: a prospective cohort study. PLoS One. 2019;14(4):e0214651.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
39.
Timmermans AAA, Seelen HAM, Willmann RD, Franck JA, Dobbelsteijn P, Saini PK, et al., editors. Technology-supported task-oriented arm training in chronic stroke patients. World Congress for Neurorehabilitation; 2008; Brasilia: The American Society of Neurorehabilitation.
40.
Merians AS, Jack D, Boian R, Tremaine M, Burdea GC, Adamovich SV, et al. Virtual reality-augmented rehabilitation for patients following stroke. Phys Ther. 2002;82(9):898–915.PubMedCrossRef
41.
Page SJ, Levine P. Modified constraint-induced therapy extension: using remote technologies to improve function. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2007;88(7):922–7.PubMedCrossRef
42.
Norouzi-Gheidari N, Archambault PS, Fung J. Effects of robot-assisted therapy on stroke rehabilitation in upper limbs: systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2012;49(4):479–96.PubMedCrossRef
43.
Mehrholz J, Pohl M, Platz T, Kugler J, Elsner B. Electromechanical and robot-assisted arm training for improving activities of daily living, arm function, and arm muscle strength after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018;9(9):Cd006876.
44.
45.
Bohannon RW, Smith MB. Interrater reliability of a modified Ashworth scale of muscle spasticity. Phys Ther. 1987;67(2):206–7.PubMedCrossRef
46.
Korpershoek C, van der Bijl J, Hafsteinsdóttir TB. Self-efficacy and its influence on recovery of patients with stroke: a systematic review. J Adv Nurs. 2011;67(9):1876–94.PubMedCrossRef
47.
Schaefer SY, Patterson CB, Lang CE. Transfer of training between distinct motor tasks after stroke: implications for task-specific approaches to upper-extremity neurorehabilitation. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2013;27(7):602–12.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
48.
Kleynen M. Perspectives on theory and application of implicit and explicit motor learning in neurological rehabilitation. Maastricht: Maastricht University; 2018.CrossRef
49.
Danks KA, Pohlig RT, Roos M, Wright TR, Reisman DS. Relationship between walking capacity, biopsychosocial factors, self-efficacy, and walking activity in persons poststroke. J Neurol Phys Ther. 2016;40(4):232–8.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
50.
French MA, Moore MF, Pohlig R, Reisman D. Self-efficacy mediates the relationship between balance/walking performance, activity, and participation after stroke. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2016;23(2):77–83.PubMedCrossRef
51.
Kwakkel G, Kollen B, Lindeman E. Understanding the pattern of functional recovery after stroke: facts and theories. Restor Neurol Neurosci. 2004;22(3-5):281–99.PubMed
52.
Kwakkel G, van Peppen R, Wagenaar RC, Wood Dauphinee S, Richards C, Ashburn A, et al. Effects of augmented exercise therapy time after stroke: a meta-analysis. Stroke. 2004;35(11):2529–39.PubMedCrossRef
53.
Wulf G, Shea C, Lewthwaite R. Motor skill learning and performance: a review of influential factors. Med Educ. 2010;44(1):75–84.PubMedCrossRef
54.
Magill RA, Hall KG. A review of the contextual interference effect in motor skill acquisition. Hum Mov Sci. 1990;9(3-5):241–89.CrossRef
55.
Duncan PW, Propst M, Nelson SG. Reliability of the Fugl-Meyer assessment of sensorimotor recovery following cerebrovascular accident. Phys Ther. 1983;63(10):1606–10.PubMedCrossRef
56.
Gladstone DJ, Danells CJ, Black SE. The Fugl-Meyer assessment of motor recovery after stroke: a critical review of its measurement properties. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2002;16(3):232–40.PubMedCrossRef
57.
Sanford J, Moreland J, Swanson LR, Stratford PW, Gowland C. Reliability of the Fugl-Meyer assessment for testing motor performance in patients following stroke. Phys Ther. 1993;73(7):447–54.PubMedCrossRef
58.
59.
Salter K, Jutai JW, Teasell R, Foley NC, Bitensky J, Bayley M. Issues for selection of outcome measures in stroke rehabilitation: ICF activity. Disabil Rehabil. 2005;27(6):315–40.PubMedCrossRef
60.
Broeks JG, Lankhorst GJ, Rumping K, Prevo AJ. The long-term outcome of arm function after stroke: results of a follow-up study. Disabil Rehabil. 1999;21(8):357–64.PubMedCrossRef
61.
Hsieh CL, Hsueh IP, Chiang FM, Lin PH. Inter-rater reliability and validity of the action research arm test in stroke patients. Age Ageing. 1998;27(2):107–13.PubMedCrossRef
62.
Lyle RC. A performance test for assessment of upper limb function in physical rehabilitation treatment and research. Int J Rehabil Res. 1981;4(4):483–92.PubMedCrossRef
63.
Weerdt de WHM. Measuring recovery of arm-hand function in stroke patients: a comparison of the Brunnstrom-Fugl-Mayer test and the Action Research Arm test. Physiother Can. 1985;37:65–70.CrossRef
64.
Yozbatiran N, Der-Yeghiaian L, Cramer SC. A standardized approach to performing the action research arm test. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2008;22(1):78–90.PubMedCrossRef
65.
van der Lee JH, Beckerman H, Knol DL, de Vet HC, Bouter LM. Clinimetric properties of the motor activity log for the assessment of arm use in hemiparetic patients. Stroke. 2004;35(6):1410–4.PubMedCrossRef
66.
67.
Salter KL, Teasell RW, Foley NC, Jutai JW. Outcome assessment in randomized controlled trials of stroke rehabilitation. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2007;86(12):1007–12.PubMedCrossRef
68.
Dorman PJ, Waddell F, Slattery J, Dennis M, Sandercock P. Is the EuroQol a valid measure of health-related quality of life after stroke? Stroke. 1997;28(10):1876–82.PubMedCrossRef
69.
Hoefman RJ, van Exel J, Brouwer WB. Measuring the impact of caregiving on informal carers: a construct validation study of the CarerQol instrument. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2013;11:173.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
70.
Hoefman RJ, van Exel NJ, Foets M, Brouwer WB. Sustained informal care: the feasibility, construct validity and test-retest reliability of the CarerQol-instrument to measure the impact of informal care in long-term care. Aging Ment Health. 2011;15(8):1018–27.PubMedCrossRef
71.
Hoefman RJ, van Exel NJ, Looren de Jong S, Redekop WK, Brouwer WB. A new test of the construct validity of the CarerQol instrument: measuring the impact of informal care giving. Qual Life Res. 2011;20(6):875–87.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
72.
73.
Mohamad Marzuki MF, Yaacob NA, Yaacob NM. Translation, cross-cultural adaptation, and validation of the Malay version of the System Usability Scale Questionnaire for the assessment of mobile apps. JMIR Hum Factors. 2018;5(2):e10308.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
74.
75.
76.
Zahra S, Bud iS. An Indonesian adaptation of the System Usability Scale (SUS). International Conference in Advanced Computer Science and Information Systems (ICACSIS); Malang, Indonesia: IEEE; 2016.
77.
Chao CM. Factors determining the behavioral intention to use mobile learning: an application and extension of the UTAUT model. Front Psychol. 2019;10:1652.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
78.
79.
Franck J. Rehabilitation of patients with a moderately to severely affected arm-hand in the sub-acute phase after stroke [PhD]. Maastricht: Maastricht University; 2020.
80.
Kwakkel G, Kollen B. Predicting improvement in the upper paretic limb after stroke: a longitudinal prospective study. Restor Neurol Neurosci. 2007;25(5-6):453–60.PubMed
81.
Caimmi M, Carda S, Giovanzana C, Maini ES, Sabatini AM, Smania N, et al. Using kinematic analysis to evaluate constraint-induced movement therapy in chronic stroke patients. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2008;22(1):31–9.PubMedCrossRef
82.
Sanchez RJ, Liu J, Rao S, Shah P, Smith R, Rahman T, et al. Automating arm movement training following severe stroke: functional exercises with quantitative feedback in a gravity-reduced environment. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2006;14(3):378–89.PubMedCrossRef
83.
Page SJ, Levine P, Leonard A, Szaflarski JP, Kissela BM. Modified constraint-induced therapy in chronic stroke: results of a single-blinded randomized controlled trial. Phys Ther. 2008;88(3):333–40.PubMedCrossRef
84.
Jorgensen HS, Nakayama H, Raaschou HO, Vive-Larsen J, Stoier M, Olsen TS. Outcome and time course of recovery in stroke. Part II: time course of recovery. The Copenhagen Stroke Study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1995;76(5):406–12.PubMedCrossRef
85.
86.
DeLisa J, Gans B, Bockeneck WL. Rehabilitation medicine: principles and practice. Hagerstown: Lippincott, Williams, & Wilkins; 1999.
87.
Thompson SC, Galbraith M, Thomas C, Swan J, Vrungos S. Caregivers of stroke patient family members: behavioral and attitudinal indicators of overprotective care. Psychol Health. 2002;17(3):297–312.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Effects of a remote-handling-concept–based task-oriented arm training (ReHab-TOAT) on arm-hand skill performance in chronic stroke: a study protocol for a two-armed randomized controlled trial
Authors
Jule Elmanowski
Henk Seelen
Richard Geers
Melanie Kleynen
Jeanine Verbunt
Publication date
01-12-2023
Publisher
BioMed Central
Keyword
Stroke
Published in
Trials / Issue 1/2023
Electronic ISSN: 1745-6215
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-023-07139-w

Other articles of this Issue 1/2023

Trials 1/2023 Go to the issue

Study protocol

Biomechanical effect of neurologic dance training (NDT) for breast cancer survivors with chemotherapy-induced neuropathy: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial and preliminary baseline data

Study protocol

The COMFORT trial: a randomised control trial comparing group-based COMpassion-FOcussed therapy and breathing pattern ReTraining with treatment as usual on the psychological functioning of patients diagnosed with cancer recurrence during COVID

Study protocol

Efficacy of beetroot juice on reducing blood pressure in hypertensive adults with autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (BEET-PKD): study protocol for a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial

Research

Can multisite clinical trial results change clinical practice? Use of long-acting injectable risperidone nationally in the Veterans Health Administration

Study protocol

Effectiveness and implementation of mPATH™-CRC: a mobile health system for colorectal cancer screening

Study protocol

Development of an international core outcome set for treatment trials in necrotizing enterocolitis—a study protocol