Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39880460›Full record

Trial reportBMJ open2025

Rehabilitation using virtual gaming for Hospital and hOMe-Based training for the Upper limb in acute and subacute Stroke (RHOMBUS II): results of a feasibility randomised controlled trial.

Tom Butcher, Alyson Warland, Victoria Stewart, Basaam Aweid, Arul Samiyappan, Elmar Kal, Jennifer Ryan, Dimitrios A Athanasiou, Karen Baker, Guillem Singla-Buxarrais and 5 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
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

15 authors.

Tom ButcherDepartment of Sport, Exercise and Rehabilitation, Northumbria University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0005-4452-4679
Alyson WarlandDepartment of Health Sciences, Brunel University of London, Uxbridge, UK.
Victoria StewartDepartment of Health Sciences, Brunel University of London, Uxbridge, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4077-8848
Basaam AweidHillingdon Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Uxbridge, UK.
Arul SamiyappanCentral and North West London NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Elmar KalDepartment of Health Sciences, Brunel University of London, Uxbridge, UK.
Jennifer RyanSchool of Physiotherapy, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.
Dimitrios A AthanasiouNeurofenix, London, UK.
Karen BakerNeurofenix, London, UK.
Guillem Singla-BuxarraisNeurofenix, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Nana AnokyeDepartment of Health Sciences, Brunel University of London, Uxbridge, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3615-344X
Carole PoundIndependent Researcher, London, UK.
Francesca GowingDepartment of Health Sciences, Brunel University of London, Uxbridge, UK.
Meriel NorrisDepartment of Health Sciences, Brunel University of London, Uxbridge, UK.
Cherry KilbrideDepartment of Health Sciences, Brunel University of London, Uxbridge, UK Cherry.Kilbride@brunel.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2045-1883

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo investigate the safety, feasibility and acceptability of the Neurofenix platform for upper-limb rehabilitation in acute and subacute stroke.

designA feasibility randomised controlled trial with a parallel process evaluation.

settingAcute Stroke Unit and participants' homes (London, UK).

participants24 adults (

interventionsParticipants randomised to the intervention or control group on a 2:1 ratio. The intervention group (n=16) received usual care plus the Neurofenix platform for 7 weeks. The control group (n=8) received usual care only. OUTCOMES: Safety was assessed through adverse events (AEs), pain, spasticity and fatigue. Feasibility was assessed through training and support requirements and intervention fidelity. Acceptability was assessed through a satisfaction questionnaire. Impairment, activity and participation outcomes were also collected at baseline and 7 weeks to assess their suitability for use in a definitive trial. RANDOMISATION: Computer-generated, allocation sequence concealed by opaque, sealed envelopes. BLINDING: Participants and assessors were not blinded; statistician blinded for data processing and analysis.

results192 stroke survivors were screened for eligibility, and 24 were recruited and randomised. Intervention group: n=16, mean age 66.5 years; median 9.5 days post stroke. CONTROL GROUP: n=8, mean age 64.6 years; median 17.5 days post stroke. Three participants withdrew before the 7-week assessment, n=21 included in the analysis (intervention group n=15; control group n=6). No significant group differences in fatigue, spasticity, pain scores or total number of AEs. The median (IQR) time to train participants was 98 (64) min over 1-3 sessions. Participants trained with the platform for a median (range) of 11 (1-58) hours, equating to 94 min extra per week. The mean satisfaction score was 34.9 out of 40.

conclusionThe Neurofenix platform is safe, feasible and well accepted as an adjunct to usual care in acute and subacute stroke rehabilitation. There was a wide range of engagement with the platform in a cohort of stroke survivors which was varied in age and level of impairment. Recruitment, training and support were manageable and completion of data was good, indicating that a future randomised controlled trial would be feasible. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN11440079.

Indexed as

StrokeStroke RehabilitationUpper ExtremityVideo GamesAgedFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient SatisfactionTreatment OutcomeREHABILITATION MEDICINEStrokeTelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID39880460
PMCPMC11781105

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.