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":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>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>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>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>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>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, <i>p</i> < 0.001) and 5.87 (SE 0.76, <i>p</i> < 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, <i>p</i> = 0.86)). A response of ≥6 points was observed in 46% in BUMP and 50% in CP.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Interpretation</h3>\n \n <p>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>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":126,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Clinical and Translational Neurology","volume":"12 1","pages":"192-202"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11752083/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Clinical and Translational Neurology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/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.
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.