ABSTRACT
Background Evidence from animal studies suggests that greater reductions in post-stroke motor impairment can be attained with significantly higher doses and intensities of therapy focused on movement quality. These studies also indicate a dose-timing interaction, with more pronounced effects if high-intensity therapy is delivered in the acute/subacute, rather than chronic, post-stroke period.
Objective To compare two approaches of delivering high-intensity, high-dose upper limb therapy in patients with subacute stroke: a novel exploratory neuro-animation therapy (NAT), and modified conventional occupational therapy (COT).
Methods Twenty-four patients were randomized to NAT or COT and underwent 30 sessions of 60 minutes time-on-task in addition to standard care. The primary outcome was the Fugl-Meyer Upper Extremity motor score (FM-UE). Secondary outcomes included: Action Research Arm Test (ARAT), grip strength, Stroke Impact Scale (SIS) hand domain, and upper-limb kinematics. Outcomes were assessed at baseline, and days 3, 90, and 180 post-training. Both groups were compared to a matched historical cohort (HC), which received only 30 minutes of upper limb therapy per day.
Results There were no significant between-group differences in FM-UE change or any of the secondary outcomes at any timepoint. Both high-dose groups showed greater recovery on the ARAT (7.3 ±2.9 pts, p=0.011), but not the FM-UE (1.4 ±2.6 pts, p =0.564) when compared to the HC.
Conclusions Two forms of high-dose intensive upper limb therapy produced greater activity but not impairment improvements compared with regular care. Neuroanimation may offer a new enjoyable, efficient and scalable way to deliver increased upper limb therapy.
Clinicaltrials.gov registration NCT02292251
Competing Interest Statement
All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/coi_disclosure.pdf and declare: JWK has received grant funding from the James. S. McDonnell Foundation, and personal fees, shares, and a consulting agreement with MindMaze, and has a patent for the game used in the study which is licensed to MindMaze. OA has been paid for advising/consulting and has stock and product royalties from MSquare Healthcare and MindMaze for the MindPod, a next generation version of the MindPod Dolphin, PR has received personal fees from MindMaze, JS has received research grants from Neurolutions, Inc. and personal fees from Fujifilm/Toyama Chemical, RS has received grant funding from Sheik Khalifa Stroke Institute, AR has received personal fees from Hocoma AG, AMGEN, and Bayer; other authors have no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influence the submitted work.
Clinical Trial
NCT02292251
Funding Statement
This study was principally funded by the James S. McDonnell Foundation Grant 220020220 (J.W.K.). Additional funding came from the P&K Puhringer Foundation (A.R.L.), Sheikh Khalifa Stroke Institute (SKSI) (J.W.K., O.A., P.R., R.S.) and the Neurology and PMR Departments at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. J.G. was supported in part by NIH grant R01NS097423. The EXPLICIT-stroke consortium and the EXPLICIT-stroke cohort were funded by The Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development (ZonMw Grant No. 89000001).
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Columbia University Medical Center IRB Johns Hopkins Medical IRB Ethikkommission Nordwest- und Zentralschweiz ad Kantonale Ethikkommission Zurich (EKNZ 2015-185 and PB_2016-00220) Swiss Agency for Therapeutic Products (Swissmedic: 2015-MD-0011)
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
