Priming and task-specific training for arm weakness post stroke: A randomized controlled trial.

IF 4.4 2区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Erin C King, Jacob M Schauer, Shyam Prabhakaran, Alexandra Wax, Sebastian Urday, Sangeetha Madhavan, Daniel M Corcos, Mary Ellen Stoykov
{"title":"Priming and task-specific training for arm weakness post stroke: A randomized controlled trial.","authors":"Erin C King, Jacob M Schauer, Shyam Prabhakaran, Alexandra Wax, Sebastian Urday, Sangeetha Madhavan, Daniel M Corcos, Mary Ellen Stoykov","doi":"10.1002/acn3.52271","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of this work was to evaluate if task-specific training (TST) preceded by bilateral upper limb motor priming (BUMP) reduces upper limb impairment more than TST preceded by control priming ([CP], sham electrical stimulation) in people with chronic stroke.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this single-blind, randomized controlled trial, 76 adults with moderate to severe upper limb hemiparesis ≥6 months post-stroke were stratified by baseline impairment and randomized to receive either BUMP or CP prior to receiving the same TST protocol. Participants completed 30 h of treatment in 15 days over 6 weeks. The primary outcome was change in Fugl-Meyer upper extremity (FMUE) from baseline to 8-week follow-up. We also report clinically meaningful response rates defined as a change in FMUE score of 6 points or greater.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In response to treatment, both groups improved to a significant extent at follow-up, exceeding the FMUE minimum clinically important difference. Those in BUMP and CP saw a mean change of 5.68 (SE 0.76, p < 0.001) and 5.87 (SE 0.76, p < 0.001) respectively. There was no significant difference between treatment arms (mean difference of -0.20 (95% CI = [-2.37, 1.97], SE = 1.08, p = 0.86)). A response of ≥6 points was observed in 46% in BUMP and 50% in CP.</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>There was no beneficial effect of BUMP. The magnitude of change seen in both groups reflects the largest improvement achieved with just 22.5 h of TST in this population, matching or out-performing more invasive, time-intensive, and costly interventions proposed in recent years.</p>","PeriodicalId":126,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Clinical and Translational Neurology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Clinical and Translational Neurology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/acn3.52271","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The objective of this work was to evaluate if task-specific training (TST) preceded by bilateral upper limb motor priming (BUMP) reduces upper limb impairment more than TST preceded by control priming ([CP], sham electrical stimulation) in people with chronic stroke.

Methods: In this single-blind, randomized controlled trial, 76 adults with moderate to severe upper limb hemiparesis ≥6 months post-stroke were stratified by baseline impairment and randomized to receive either BUMP or CP prior to receiving the same TST protocol. Participants completed 30 h of treatment in 15 days over 6 weeks. The primary outcome was change in Fugl-Meyer upper extremity (FMUE) from baseline to 8-week follow-up. We also report clinically meaningful response rates defined as a change in FMUE score of 6 points or greater.

Results: In response to treatment, both groups improved to a significant extent at follow-up, exceeding the FMUE minimum clinically important difference. Those in BUMP and CP saw a mean change of 5.68 (SE 0.76, p < 0.001) and 5.87 (SE 0.76, p < 0.001) respectively. There was no significant difference between treatment arms (mean difference of -0.20 (95% CI = [-2.37, 1.97], SE = 1.08, p = 0.86)). A response of ≥6 points was observed in 46% in BUMP and 50% in CP.

Interpretation: There was no beneficial effect of BUMP. The magnitude of change seen in both groups reflects the largest improvement achieved with just 22.5 h of TST in this population, matching or out-performing more invasive, time-intensive, and costly interventions proposed in recent years.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Annals of Clinical and Translational Neurology
Annals of Clinical and Translational Neurology Medicine-Neurology (clinical)
CiteScore
9.10
自引率
1.90%
发文量
218
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: Annals of Clinical and Translational Neurology is a peer-reviewed journal for rapid dissemination of high-quality research related to all areas of neurology. The journal publishes original research and scholarly reviews focused on the mechanisms and treatments of diseases of the nervous system; high-impact topics in neurologic education; and other topics of interest to the clinical neuroscience community.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信