The effect of mirror therapy can be improved by simultaneous robotic assistance.

Autor: Schrader M; P.A.N. Zentrum für Post-Akute Neurorehabilitation, Fürst Donnersmarck-Stiftung zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany., Sterr A; P.A.N. Zentrum für Post-Akute Neurorehabilitation, Fürst Donnersmarck-Stiftung zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.; School of Psychology, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK., Kettlitz R; P.A.N. Zentrum für Post-Akute Neurorehabilitation, Fürst Donnersmarck-Stiftung zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany., Wohlmeiner A; Aatalklinik Wünnenberg, Bad Wünnenberg, Germany., Buschfort R; Aatalklinik Wünnenberg, Bad Wünnenberg, Germany., Dohle C; P.A.N. Zentrum für Post-Akute Neurorehabilitation, Fürst Donnersmarck-Stiftung zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.; Center for Stroke Research Berlin, Charité - University Medicine Berlin, Berlin, Germany., Bamborschke S; P.A.N. Zentrum für Post-Akute Neurorehabilitation, Fürst Donnersmarck-Stiftung zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: Restorative neurology and neuroscience [Restor Neurol Neurosci] 2022; Vol. 40 (3), pp. 185-194.
DOI: 10.3233/RNN-221263
Abstrakt: Background: Standard 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.
Objective: The 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).
Methods: This 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.
Results: 24 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.
Conclusions: The 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.
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:
Nepřihlášeným uživatelům se plný text nezobrazuje