Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32831097›Full record

Trial reportJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2020

Neurocognitive robot-assisted rehabilitation of hand function: a randomized control trial on motor recovery in subacute stroke.

Raffaele Ranzani, Olivier Lambercy, Jean-Claude Metzger, Antonella Califfi, Stefania Regazzi, Daria Dinacci, Claudio Petrillo, Paolo Rossi, Fabio M Conti, Roger Gassert

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02096445 (Neurocognitive Robot-assisted Rehabilitation of Hand Function After Stroke), which is not on this map. Cited by 61 papers, 13 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
61citing papers in PubMed, 13 pooled it
6.8field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT02096445 nacompletednot on this map

Neurocognitive Robot-assisted Rehabilitation of Hand Function After Stroke

TypeinterventionalSponsorRoger GassertRan2013 to 2017Enrolled34ConditionsStroke, Upper Extremity ParesisArmsrobot-assisted neurocognitive therapy of hand function, Conventional neurocognitive rehabilitation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

61 citing papers in PubMed, 13 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 102 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Occupational therapy for cognitive impairment in stroke patients.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022
    Pooled it
  9. Robot-assisted distal training improves upper limb dexterity and function after stroke: a systematic review and meta-regression.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2022
    Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

1 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Raffaele RanzaniRehabilitation Engineering Laboratory, Institute of Robotics and Intelligent Systems, Department of Health Sciences and Technology, BAA Lengghalde 5, 8008, Zurich, Switzerland. relab.publications@hest.ethz.ch.ORCID 0000-0001-5470-9064
Olivier LambercyRehabilitation Engineering Laboratory, Institute of Robotics and Intelligent Systems, Department of Health Sciences and Technology, BAA Lengghalde 5, 8008, Zurich, Switzerland.
Jean-Claude MetzgerRehabilitation Engineering Laboratory, Institute of Robotics and Intelligent Systems, Department of Health Sciences and Technology, BAA Lengghalde 5, 8008, Zurich, Switzerland.
Antonella CaliffiClinica Hildebrand Centro di Riabilitazione Brissago, Via Crodolo, 6614, Brissago, Switzerland.
Stefania RegazziClinica Hildebrand Centro di Riabilitazione Brissago, Via Crodolo, 6614, Brissago, Switzerland.
Daria DinacciClinica Hildebrand Centro di Riabilitazione Brissago, Via Crodolo, 6614, Brissago, Switzerland.
Claudio PetrilloClinica Hildebrand Centro di Riabilitazione Brissago, Via Crodolo, 6614, Brissago, Switzerland.
Paolo RossiClinica Hildebrand Centro di Riabilitazione Brissago, Via Crodolo, 6614, Brissago, Switzerland.
Fabio M ContiClinica Hildebrand Centro di Riabilitazione Brissago, Via Crodolo, 6614, Brissago, Switzerland.
Roger GassertRehabilitation Engineering Laboratory, Institute of Robotics and Intelligent Systems, Department of Health Sciences and Technology, BAA Lengghalde 5, 8008, Zurich, Switzerland.
ETH Zurich · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHand function is often impaired after stroke, strongly affecting the ability to perform daily activities. Upper limb robotic devices have been developed to complement rehabilitation therapy offered to persons who suffered a stroke, but they rarely focus on the training of hand sensorimotor function. The primary goal of this study was to evaluate whether robot-assisted therapy of hand function following a neurocognitive approach (i.e., combining motor training with somatosensory and cognitive tasks) produces an equivalent decrease in upper limb motor impairment compared to dose-matched conventional neurocognitive therapy, when embedded in the rehabilitation program of inpatients in the subacute stage after stroke.

methodsA parallel-group, randomized controlled trial was conducted on subjects with subacute stroke receiving either conventional or robot-assisted neurocognitive hand therapy using a haptic device. Therapy was provided for 15, 45-min sessions over four weeks, nested within the standard therapy program. Primary outcome was the change from baseline in the upper extremity part of the Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA-UE) after the intervention, which was compared between groups using equivalence testing. Secondary outcome measures included upper limb motor, sensory and cognitive assessments, delivered therapy dose, as well as questionnaires on user technology acceptance.

resultsThirty-three participants with stroke were enrolled. 14 subjects in the robot-assisted and 13 subjects in the conventional therapy group completed the study. At the end of intervention, week 8 and week 32, the robot-assisted/conventional therapy group improved by 7.14/6.85, 7.79/7.31, and 8.64/8.08 points on the FMA-UE, respectively, establishing that motor recovery in the robot-assisted group is non-inferior to that in the control group.

conclusionsNeurocognitive robot-assisted therapy of hand function allows for a non-inferior motor recovery compared to conventional dose-matched neurocognitive therapy when performed during inpatient rehabilitation in the subacute stage. This allows the early familiarization of subjects with stroke to the use of such technologies, as a first step towards minimal therapist supervision in the clinic, or directly at home after hospital discharge, to help increase the dose of hand therapy for persons with stroke.

trial registrationEUDAMED database (CIV-13-02-009921), clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02096445). Registered 26 March 2014 - Retrospectively registered, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02096445.

Indexed as

Recovery of FunctionAdultAgedExercise TherapyFemaleHandHumansMaleMiddle AgedRoboticsStrokeStroke RehabilitationHandHapticsNeurorehabilitationRoboticsStroke

Identifiers

PMID32831097
PMCPMC7444058
OpenAlexW3080554008

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.