Trial reportRestorative neurology and neuroscience2022
The effect of mirror therapy can be improved by simultaneous robotic assistance.
Trial report in Restorative neurology and neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Comparison Of Robotic And Conventional Mirror Therapy On Hand Motoric Recovery And Functional Outcomes For Rehabilitation Of Post-Stroke Patients
Effects of Robot-Assisted Mirror Therapy on Upper Extremity Function in the Rehabilitation of Hemiparetic Cerebral Palsy
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of mirror and robot-assisted therapy for upper extremity rehabilitation in post-stroke patients: a meta-analysis.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026Pooled it
- Effects of robot assisted mirror therapy on motor function and cortical activation in patients with right hemisphere damage.Scientific reports · 2025Trial
- Recent Advances in Sensor-Based Upper-Limb and Hand Exoskeletons for Post-Stroke Rehabilitation: A Technical and Biomedical Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- A Scoping Review of Technology-Based Approaches for Upper Limb Motor Rehabilitation after Stroke: Are We Really Targeting Severe Impairment?Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Shaping corticospinal pathways in virtual reality: effects of task complexity and sensory feedback during mirror therapy in neurologically intact individuals.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2024Article
- Advances in Neurorehabilitation: Strategies and Outcomes for Traumatic Brain Injury Recovery.Cureus · 2024Review
- Therapeutic robots for post-stroke rehabilitation.Medical review (2021) · 2024Review
- A mirror therapy system using virtual reality and an actuated exoskeleton for the recovery of hand motor impairments: a study of acceptability, usability, and embodiment.Scientific reports · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundStandard mirror therapy (MT) is a well-established therapy regime for severe arm paresis after acquired brain injury. Bilateral robot-assisted mirror therapy (RMT) could be a solution to provide visual and somatosensory feedback simultaneously.
objectiveThe study compares the treatment effects of MT with a version of robot-assisted MT where the affected arm movement was delivered through a robotic glove (RMT).
methodsThis is a parallel, randomized trial, including patients with severe arm paresis after stroke or traumatic brain injury with a Fugl-Meyer subscore hand/finger < 4. Participants received either RMT or MT in individual 30 minute sessions (15 sessions within 5 weeks). Main outcome parameter was the improvement in the Fugl-Meyer Assessment upper extremity (FMA-UE) motor score. Additionally, the Motricity Index (MI) and the FMA-UE sensation test as well as a pain scale were recorded. Furthermore, patients' and therapists' experiences with RMT were captured through qualitative tools.
results24 patients completed the study. Comparison of the FMA-UE motor score difference values between the two groups revealed a significantly greater therapy effect in the RMT group than the MT group (p = 0.006). There were no significant differences for the MI (p = 0.108), the FMA-UE surface sensibility subscore (p = 0.403) as well as the FMA-UE position sense subscore (p = 0.192). In both groups the levels of pain remained stable throughout the intervention. No other adverse effects were observed. The RMT training was well accepted by patients and therapists.
conclusionsThe study provides evidence that bilateral RMT achieves greater treatment benefit on motor function than conventional MT. The use of robotics seems to be a good method to implement passive co-movement in clinical practice. Our study further demonstrates that this form of training can feasibly and effectively be delivered in an inpatient setting.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.