Trunk training for improving activities in people with stroke

Thijs, Liselot; Denissen, Stijn; Mehrholz, Jan; Elsner, Bernhard; Lemmens, Robin; Verheyden, Geert

doi:10.1002/14651858.cd013712

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our finding can be explained by the fact that, at baseline, both groups already had a high level of independence in daily activity (measured with the Barthel Index), while previous studies evaluated the effect on functional performance in the earlier rehabilitation phase, where independence in daily life was more affected. Currently, a Cochrane review and meta-analysis is being performed addressing treatment effects of sitting balance training on functional performance [ 61 ]. This will shed light on the possibility of trunk therapy's improving functional independence but this should also be investigated in a future trial.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Technology-supported sitting balance therapy versus usual care in the chronic stage after stroke: a pilot randomized controlled trial

Thijs

Voets

Wiskerke

et al. 2021

J NeuroEngineering Rehabil

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Technology development for sitting balance therapy and trunk rehabilitation is scarce. Hence, intensive one-to-one therapist-patient training is still required. We have developed a novel rehabilitation prototype, specifically aimed at providing sitting balance therapy. We investigated whether technology-supported sitting balance training was feasible and safe in chronic stroke patients and we determined whether clinical outcomes improved after a four-week programme, compared with usual care. Methods In this parallel-group, assessor-blinded, randomized controlled pilot trial, we divided first-event chronic stroke participants into two groups. The experimental group received usual care plus additional therapy supported by rehabilitation technology, consisting of 12 sessions of 50 min of therapy over four weeks. The control group received usual care only. We assessed all participants twice pre-intervention and once post-intervention. Feasibility and safety were descriptively analysed. Between-group analysis evaluated the pre-to-post differences in changes in motor and functional outcomes. Results In total, 30 participants were recruited and 29 completed the trial (experimental group: n = 14; control group: n = 15). There were no between-group differences at baseline. Therapy was evaluated as feasible by participants and therapist. There were no serious adverse events during sitting balance therapy. Changes in clinical outcomes from pre- to post-intervention demonstrated increases in the experimental than in the control group for: sitting balance and trunk function, evaluated by the Trunk Impairment Scale (mean points score (SD) 7.07 (1.69) versus 0.33 (2.35); p < 0.000); maximum gait speed, assessed with the 10 Metre Walk Test (mean gait speed 0.16 (0.16) m/s versus 0.06 (0.06) m/s; p = 0.003); and functional balance, measured using the Berg balance scale (median points score (IQR) 4.5 (5) versus 0 (4); p = 0.014). Conclusions Technology-supported sitting balance training in persons with chronic stroke is feasible and safe. A four-week, 12-session programme on top of usual care suggests beneficial effects for trunk function, maximum gait speed and functional balance. Trial Registration:ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04467554, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04467554, date of Registration: 13 July 2020.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Technology-supported sitting balance therapy versus usual care in the chronic stage after stroke: a pilot randomized controlled trial

Thijs

Voets

Wiskerke

et al. 2021

J NeuroEngineering Rehabil

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This can be explained by the fact that at baseline both groups had a high level of independence in daily activity as measured with Barthel Index and that in the previous studies effect on functional performance was evaluated in the earlier rehabilitation phase, where independence in daily life is more affected. Currently, a Cochrane review and meta-analysis is performed addressing treatment effects of sitting balance training on functional performance (63). This will shed light on the possibility of trunk therapy on improving functional independence but should be investigated as well in a future trial.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Technology-supported sitting balance therapy versus usual care in the chronic stage after stroke: A pilot randomized controlled trial

Thijs

Voets

Wiskerke

et al. 2021

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Insights in evidence on sitting balance and trunk rehabilitation have not resulted in specific device development. Hence, intensive one-by-one therapist-patient guidance is still required. We developed a novel rehabilitation prototype, specifically aimed at providing sitting balance therapy. In this study, we investigated if technology-supported sitting balance training was feasible and safe in chronic stroke patients and we evaluated whether clinical outcomes improved after a four-week programme when compared with usual care. Methods. In this parallel-group, assessor-blinded, randomized controlled pilot trial, we divided first event chronic stroke participants randomly into two groups. The experimental group received usual care plus additional therapy supported by rehabilitation technology consisting of 12 sessions of 50 minutes of therapy in four weeks. The control group received usual care only. We assessed all participants twice pre-intervention and once post-intervention. Feasibility and safety were descriptively analysed. Between-group analysis evaluated the differences in changes in motor and functional outcomes. Results. In total, 30 participants were recruited and 29 completed the trial (experimental group, n=14; control group, n=15). There were no between-group differences at baseline. Therapy was evaluated feasible by participants and therapist. There were no serious adverse events during sitting balance therapy. Changes in clinical outcomes from pre- to post-intervention demonstrated an increase in the experimental compared to the control group for trunk function; mean (standard deviation [SD]): 7.07 (1.69) versus 0.33 (2.35) points on trunk impairment scale (p<.000), maximum walking speed on 10-meter walk test (0.16 (0.16) m/s in the experimental group versus 0.06 (0.06) m/s in the control group; p=.003), and functional balance measured using Berg balance scale (median [interquartile range] 4.5 (5) points in the experimental group versus 0 (4) points in the control group (p=.014). Conclusions. Technology-supported sitting balance training in persons with chronic stroke is feasible and safe. A four-week, 12-hour programme on top of usual care suggests beneficial effects for trunk function, maximum gait speed and functional balance.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04467554, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04467554, date of Registration: 13 July 2020.

show abstract