ArmAssist Robotic System versus Matched Conventional Therapy for Poststroke Upper Limb Rehabilitation: A Randomized Clinical Trial

The ArmAssist is a simple low-cost robotic system for upper limb motor training that combines known benefits of repetitive task-oriented training, greater intensity of practice, and less dependence on therapist assistance. The aim of this preliminary study was to compare the efficacy of ArmAssist (AA) robotic training against matched conventional arm training in subacute stroke subjects with moderate-to-severe upper limb impairment. Twenty-six subjects were enrolled within 3 months of stroke and randomly assigned to the AA group or Control group (n = 13 each). Both groups were trained 5 days per week for 3 weeks. The primary outcome measure was Fugl-Meyer Assessment-Upper Extremity (FMA-UE) motor score, and the secondary outcomes were Wolf Motor Function Test-Functional Ability Scale (WMFT-FAS) and Barthel index (BI). The AA group, in comparison to the Control group, showed significantly greater increases in FMA-UE score (18.0 ± 9.4 versus 7.5 ± 5.5, p = 0.002) and WMFT-FAS score (14.1 ± 7.9 versus 6.7 ± 7.8, p = 0.025) after 3 weeks of treatment, whereas the increase in BI was not significant (21.2 ± 24.8 versus 13.1 ± 10.7, p = 0.292). There were no adverse events. We conclude that arm training using the AA robotic device is safe and able to reduce motor deficits more effectively than matched conventional arm training in subacute phase of stroke. The study has been registered at the ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT02729649.

[1]  P. Langhorne,et al.  Physiotherapy after stroke: more is better? , 1996, Physiotherapy research international : the journal for researchers and clinicians in physical therapy.

[2]  Cristina Rodriguez-de-Pablo,et al.  Validating ArmAssist Assessment as outcome measure in upper-limb post-stroke telerehabilitation , 2015, 2015 37th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC).

[3]  Terence J Quinn,et al.  Assessment scales in stroke: clinimetric and clinical considerations , 2013, Clinical interventions in aging.

[4]  E. Taub,et al.  The reliability of the wolf motor function test for assessing upper extremity function after stroke. , 2001, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[5]  Martin Levesley,et al.  Home-based Computer Assisted Arm Rehabilitation (hCAAR) robotic device for upper limb exercise after stroke: results of a feasibility study in home setting , 2014, Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation.

[6]  H. Krebs,et al.  Effects of Robot-Assisted Therapy on Upper Limb Recovery After Stroke: A Systematic Review , 2008, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.

[7]  V. Feigin,et al.  Stroke epidemiology: a review of population-based studies of incidence, prevalence, and case-fatality in the late 20th century , 2003, The Lancet Neurology.

[8]  Stefano Mazzoleni,et al.  Effects of upper limb robot-assisted therapy on motor recovery in subacute stroke patients , 2014, Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation.

[9]  B. White,et al.  A MEASURE OF DISABILITY. , 1964, Archives of environmental health.

[10]  S. Masiero,et al.  Upper-limb robot-assisted therapy in rehabilitation of acute stroke patients: focused review and results of new randomized controlled trial. , 2011, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[11]  Maarten Uyttenboogaart,et al.  Optimizing Cutoff Scores for the Barthel Index and the Modified Rankin Scale for Defining Outcome in Acute Stroke Trials , 2005, Stroke.

[12]  Jiping He,et al.  Feasibility studies of robot-assisted stroke rehabilitation at clinic and home settings using RUPERT , 2011, 2011 IEEE International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics.

[13]  Maria Chiara Carrozza,et al.  Upper Limb Robot-Assisted Therapy in Chronic and Subacute Stroke Patients: A Kinematic Analysis , 2013, American journal of physical medicine & rehabilitation.

[14]  J W Jutai,et al.  Issues for selection of outcome measures in stroke rehabilitation: ICF Body Functions , 2005, Disability and rehabilitation.

[15]  T. Platz,et al.  Electromechanical and robot-assisted arm training for improving generic activities of daily living, arm function, and arm muscle strength after stroke. , 2012, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[16]  G. Kwakkel,et al.  Probability of regaining dexterity in the flaccid upper limb: impact of severity of paresis and time since onset in acute stroke. , 2003, Stroke.

[17]  E. Taub,et al.  The EXCITE Trial: Attributes of the Wolf Motor Function Test in Patients with Subacute Stroke , 2005, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.

[18]  S. Cramer,et al.  Targeted engagement of a dorsal premotor circuit in the treatment of post-stroke paresis. , 2013, NeuroRehabilitation.

[19]  A. Fugl-Meyer,et al.  The post-stroke hemiplegic patient. 1. a method for evaluation of physical performance. , 1975, Scandinavian journal of rehabilitation medicine.

[20]  Stefan Hesse,et al.  Effect on arm function and cost of robot-assisted group therapy in subacute patients with stroke and a moderately to severely affected arm: a randomized controlled trial , 2014, Clinical rehabilitation.

[21]  P. Laake,et al.  Correlates of subjective well-being in stroke patients. , 1998, Stroke.

[22]  Y. Hsieh,et al.  Effects of robot-assisted upper limb rehabilitation on daily function and real-world arm activity in patients with chronic stroke: a randomized controlled trial , 2012, Clinical rehabilitation.

[23]  P. Clark,et al.  Factors Influencing Stroke Survivors' Quality of Life During Subacute Recovery , 2005, Stroke.

[24]  P. Stratford,et al.  Reliability of the Fugl-Meyer assessment for testing motor performance in patients following stroke. , 1993, Physical therapy.

[25]  R. Teasell,et al.  An Evidence-Based Review of Stroke Rehabilitation , 2003, Topics in stroke rehabilitation.

[26]  T. Platz,et al.  Electromechanical and robot-assisted arm training for improving activities of daily living, arm function, and arm muscle strength after stroke. , 2015, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[27]  S. Black,et al.  The Fugl-Meyer Assessment of Motor Recovery after Stroke: A Critical Review of Its Measurement Properties , 2002, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.