Use the Back button in your browser to see the other results of your search or to select another record.
| Functional strength training and movement performance therapy for upper limb recovery early poststroke-efficacy, neural correlates, predictive markers, and cost-effectiveness: FAST-INdiCATE trial |
| Hunter SM, Johansen-Berg H, Ward N, Kennedy NC, Chandler E, Weir CJ, Rothwell J, Wing AM, Grey MJ, Barton G, Leavey NM, Havis C, Lemon RN, Burridge J, Dymond A, Pomeroy VM |
| Frontiers in Neurology 2018 Jan 25;8(733):Epub |
| clinical trial |
| 6/10 [Eligibility criteria: No; Random allocation: Yes; Concealed allocation: Yes; Baseline comparability: Yes; Blind subjects: No; Blind therapists: No; Blind assessors: No; Adequate follow-up: No; Intention-to-treat analysis: Yes; Between-group comparisons: Yes; Point estimates and variability: Yes. Note: Eligibility criteria item does not contribute to total score] *This score has been confirmed* |
|
BACKGROUND: Variation in physiological deficits underlying upper limb paresis after stroke could influence how people recover and to which physical therapy they best respond. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether functional strength training (FST) improves upper limb recovery more than movement performance therapy (MPT). To identify: (a) neural correlates of response and (b) whether pre-intervention neural characteristics predict response. DESIGN: Explanatory investigations within a randomised, controlled, observer-blind, and multicentre trial. Randomisation was computer-generated and concealed by an independent facility until baseline measures were completed. Primary time point was outcome, after the 6-week intervention phase. Follow-up was at 6 months after stroke. PARTICIPANTS: With some voluntary muscle contraction in the paretic upper limb, not full dexterity, when recruited up to 60 days after an anterior cerebral circulation territory stroke. INTERVENTIONS: Conventional physical therapy (CPT) plus either MPT or FST for up to 90 min-a-day, 5 days-a-week for 6 weeks. FST was "hands-off" progressive resistive exercise cemented into functional task training. MPT was "hands-on" sensory/facilitation techniques for smooth and accurate movement. OUTCOMES: The primary efficacy measure was the Action Research Arm Test (ARAT). Neural measures: fractional anisotropy (FA) corpus callosum midline; asymmetry of corticospinal tracts FA; and resting motor threshold (RMT) of motor-evoked potentials. ANALYSIS: Covariance models tested ARAT change from baseline. At outcome: correlation coefficients assessed relationship between change in ARAT and neural measures; an interaction term assessed whether baseline neural characteristics predicted response. RESULTS: 288 Participants had: mean age of 72.2 (SD 12.5) years and mean ARAT 25.5 (18.2). For 240 participants with ARAT at baseline and outcome the mean change was 9.70 (11.72) for FST+CPT and 7.90 (9.18) for MPT+CPT, which did not differ statistically (p = 0.298). Correlations between ARAT change scores and baseline neural values were between 0.199, p = 0.320 for MPT+CPT RMT (n = 27) and -0.147, p = 0.385 for asymmetry of corticospinal tracts FA (n = 37). Interaction effects between neural values and ARAT change between baseline and outcome were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference in upper limb improvement between FST and MPT. Baseline neural measures did not correlate with upper limb recovery or predict therapy response. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN19090862, http://www.controlledtrials.com.
|