Feasibility and Preliminary Efficacy of a Combined Virtual Reality, Robotics and Electrical Stimulation Intervention in Upper Extremity Stroke Rehabilitation

Overview

Journal J Neuroeng Rehabil

Publisher Biomed Central

Specialties Biomedical Engineering
Neurology
Rehabilitation Medicine

Date 2021 Apr 15

PMID 33853614

Citations 10

Authors

Nahid Norouzi-Gheidari

Philippe S Archambault

Katia Monte-Silva

Dahlia Kairy

Heidi Sveistrup

Michael Trivino

Mindy F Levin

Marie-Helene Milot

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Approximately 80% of individuals with chronic stroke present with long lasting upper extremity (UE) impairments. We designed the perSonalized UPper Extremity Rehabilitation (SUPER) intervention, which combines robotics, virtual reality activities, and neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES). The objectives of our study were to determine the feasibility and the preliminary efficacy of the SUPER intervention in individuals with moderate/severe stroke.

Methods: Stroke participants (n = 28) received a 4-week intervention (3 × per week), tailored to their functional level. The functional integrity of the corticospinal tract was assessed using the Predict Recovery Potential algorithm, involving measurements of motor evoked potentials and manual muscle testing. Those with low potential for hand recovery (shoulder group; n = 18) received a robotic-rehabilitation intervention focusing on elbow and shoulder movements only. Those with a good potential for hand recovery (hand group; n = 10) received EMG-triggered NMES, in addition to robot therapy. The primary outcomes were the Fugl-Meyer UE assessment and the ABILHAND assessment. Secondary outcomes included the Motor Activity Log and the Stroke Impact Scale.

Results: Eighteen participants (64%), in either the hand or the shoulder group, showed changes in the Fugl-Meyer UE or in the ABILHAND assessment superior to the minimal clinically important difference.

Conclusions: This indicates that our personalized approach is feasible and may be beneficial in improving UE function in individuals with moderate to severe impairments due to stroke.

Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03903770. Registered 4 April 2019. Registered retrospectively.

Citing Articles

Specifications and functional impact of a self-triggered grasp neuroprosthesis developed to restore prehension in hemiparetic post-stroke subjects.

Le Guillou R, Froger J, Morin M, Couderc M, Cormier C, Azevedo-Coste C Biomed Eng Online. 2024; 23(1):129.

PMID: 39709421 PMC: 11662519. DOI: 10.1186/s12938-024-01323-y.

Maintaining a Dynamic Brain: A Review of Empirical Findings Describing the Roles of Exercise, Learning, and Environmental Enrichment in Neuroplasticity from 2017-2023.

Milbocker K, Smith I, Klintsova A Brain Plast. 2024; 9(1-2):75-95.

PMID: 38993580 PMC: 11234674. DOI: 10.3233/BPL-230151.

Optimizing shoulder elevation assist rate in exoskeletal rehabilitation based on muscular activity indices: a clinical feasibility study.

Ito D, Fukuda M, Hosoi Y, Hirose R, Teramae T, Kamimoto T BMC Neurol. 2024; 24(1):144.

PMID: 38724916 PMC: 11080160. DOI: 10.1186/s12883-024-03651-x.

Therapeutic robots for post-stroke rehabilitation.

Hong R, Li B, Bao Y, Liu L, Jin L Med Rev (2021). 2024; 4(1):55-67.

PMID: 38515779 PMC: 10954296. DOI: 10.1515/mr-2023-0054.

Extended reality to assess post-stroke manual dexterity: contrasts between the classic box and block test, immersive virtual reality with controllers, with hand-tracking, and mixed-reality tests.

Everard G, Burton Q, Van de Sype V, Bibentyo T, Auvinet E, Edwards M J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2024; 21(1):36.

PMID: 38491540 PMC: 10941416. DOI: 10.1186/s12984-024-01332-x.

References

Lin K, Fu T, Wu C, Wang Y, Liu J, Hsieh C . Minimal detectable change and clinically important difference of the Stroke Impact Scale in stroke patients. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2010; 24(5):486-92. DOI: 10.1177/1545968309356295. View

Fasoli S, Krebs H, Stein J, Frontera W, Hogan N . Effects of robotic therapy on motor impairment and recovery in chronic stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2003; 84(4):477-82. DOI: 10.1053/apmr.2003.50110. View

Rosewilliam S, Malhotra S, Roffe C, Jones P, Pandyan A . Can surface neuromuscular electrical stimulation of the wrist and hand combined with routine therapy facilitate recovery of arm function in patients with stroke?. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2012; 93(10):1715-21.e1. DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2012.05.017. View

Cauraugh J, Kim S . Two coupled motor recovery protocols are better than one: electromyogram-triggered neuromuscular stimulation and bilateral movements. Stroke. 2002; 33(6):1589-94. DOI: 10.1161/01.str.0000016926.77114.a6. View

Laver K, George S, Thomas S, Deutsch J, Crotty M . Virtual reality for stroke rehabilitation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015; (2):CD008349. PMC: 6465102. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008349.pub3. View

Stinear C, Lang C, Zeiler S, Byblow W . Advances and challenges in stroke rehabilitation. Lancet Neurol. 2020; 19(4):348-360. DOI: 10.1016/S1474-4422(19)30415-6. View

Langhorne P, Coupar F, Pollock A . Motor recovery after stroke: a systematic review. Lancet Neurol. 2009; 8(8):741-54. DOI: 10.1016/S1474-4422(09)70150-4. View

Fugl-Meyer A, Jaasko L, Leyman I, Olsson S, Steglind S . The post-stroke hemiplegic patient. 1. a method for evaluation of physical performance. Scand J Rehabil Med. 1975; 7(1):13-31. View

McCabe J, Monkiewicz M, Holcomb J, Pundik S, Daly J . Comparison of robotics, functional electrical stimulation, and motor learning methods for treatment of persistent upper extremity dysfunction after stroke: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2014; 96(6):981-90. DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2014.10.022. View

10.

Wang T, Lin K, Wu C, Chung C, Pei Y, Teng Y . Validity, responsiveness, and clinically important difference of the ABILHAND questionnaire in patients with stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2011; 92(7):1086-91. DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2011.01.020. View

11.

Gladstone D, Danells C, Black S . The fugl-meyer assessment of motor recovery after stroke: a critical review of its measurement properties. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2002; 16(3):232-40. DOI: 10.1177/154596802401105171. View

12.

Milot M, Spencer S, Chan V, Allington J, Klein J, Chou C . Corticospinal excitability as a predictor of functional gains at the affected upper limb following robotic training in chronic stroke survivors. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2014; 28(9):819-27. PMC: 4167999. DOI: 10.1177/1545968314527351. View

13.

Prange G, Jannink M, Groothuis-Oudshoorn C, Hermens H, IJzerman M . Systematic review of the effect of robot-aided therapy on recovery of the hemiparetic arm after stroke. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2006; 43(2):171-84. DOI: 10.1682/jrrd.2005.04.0076. View

14.

Coupar F, Pollock A, Rowe P, Weir C, Langhorne P . Predictors of upper limb recovery after stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Rehabil. 2011; 26(4):291-313. DOI: 10.1177/0269215511420305. View

15.

Norouzi-Gheidari N, Archambault P, Fung J . Changes in arm kinematics of chronic stroke individuals following "Assist-As-Asked" robot-assisted training in virtual and physical environments: A proof-of-concept study. J Rehabil Assist Technol Eng. 2020; 7:2055668320926054. PMC: 7309382. DOI: 10.1177/2055668320926054. View

16.

Kwakkel G, Kollen B, van der Grond J, Prevo A . 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. DOI: 10.1161/01.STR.0000087172.16305.CD. View

17.

Arya K, Verma R, Garg R . Estimating the minimal clinically important difference of an upper extremity recovery measure in subacute stroke patients. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2011; 18 Suppl 1:599-610. DOI: 10.1310/tsr18s01-599. View

18.

Stinear C, Barber P, Smale P, Coxon J, Fleming M, Byblow W . Functional potential in chronic stroke patients depends on corticospinal tract integrity. Brain. 2006; 130(Pt 1):170-80. DOI: 10.1093/brain/awl333. View

19.

Simpson L, Eng J . Functional recovery following stroke: capturing changes in upper-extremity function. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2012; 27(3):240-50. PMC: 4486379. DOI: 10.1177/1545968312461719. View

20.

Borson S, Scanlan J, Chen P, Ganguli M . The Mini-Cog as a screen for dementia: validation in a population-based sample. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2003; 51(10):1451-4. DOI: 10.1046/j.1532-5415.2003.51465.x. View