Trial reportJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2023
Efficacy of interactive manual dexterity training after stroke: a pilot single-blinded randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03934073 (Evaluation of the Benefit of the Training of the Manual Dexterity Post-stroke), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 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.
Evaluation of the Benefit of the Training of the Manual Dexterity Post-stroke: Effect on the Function and Spontaneous Use of the Hand and the Cerebral Plasticity
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Increased dual-task interference during upper limb movements in stroke exceeding that found in aging - a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Pooled it
- Biofeedback Training for 3-Dimensional Finger Force Control to Improve Upper Limb Function Poststroke: An RCT.Stroke · 2025Trial
- Effects and neural mechanisms of a brain-computer interface-controlled soft robotic glove on upper limb function in patients with subacute stroke: a randomized controlled fNIRS study.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2025Trial
- Reconstructing hand gestures with synergies extracted from dance movements.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Divided attention and manual visuomotor control in stroke: a combined dual-task and eye movement study.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the efficacy of Dextrain Manipulandum™ training of dexterity components such as force control and independent finger movements, to dose-matched conventional therapy (CT) post-stroke.
methodsA prospective, single-blind, pilot randomized clinical trial was conducted. Chronic-phase post-stroke patients with mild-to-moderate dexterity impairment (Box and Block Test (BBT) > 1) received 12 sessions of Dextrain or CT. Blinded measures were obtained before and after training and at 3-months follow-up. Primary outcome was BBT-change (after-before training). Secondary outcomes included changes in motor impairments, activity limitations and dexterity components. Corticospinal excitability and short intracortical inhibition (SICI) were measured using transcranial magnetic stimulation.
resultsBBT-change after training did not differ between the Dextrain (N = 21) vs CT group (N = 21) (median [IQR] = 5[2-7] vs 4[2-7], respectively; P = 0.36). Gains in BBT were maintained at the 3-month post-training follow-up, with a non-significant trend for enhanced BBT-change in the Dextrain group (median [IQR] = 3[- 1-7.0], P = 0.06). Several secondary outcomes showed significantly larger changes in the Dextrain group: finger tracking precision (mean ± SD = 0.3 ± 0.3N vs - 0.1 ± 0.33N; P < 0.0018), independent finger movements (34.7 ± 25.1 ms vs 7.7 ± 18.5 ms, P = 0.02) and maximal finger tapping speed (8.4 ± 7.1 vs 4.5 ± 4.9, P = 0.045). At follow-up, Dextrain group showed significantly greater improvement in Motor Activity Log (median/IQR = 0.7/0.2-0.8 vs 0.2/0.1-0.6, P = 0.05). Across both groups SICI increased in patients with greater BBT-change (Rho = 0.80, P = 0.006). Comparing Dextrain subgroups with maximal grip force higher/lower than median (61.2%), BBT-change was significantly larger in patients with low vs high grip force (7.5 ± 5.6 vs 2.9 ± 2.8; respectively, P = 0.015).
conclusionsAlthough immediate improvements in gross dexterity post-stroke did not significantly differ between Dextrain training and CT, our findings suggest that Dextrain enhances recovery of several dexterity components and reported hand-use, particularly when motor impairment is moderate (low initial grip force). Findings need to be confirmed in a larger trial. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03934073 (retrospectively registered).
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.