Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.
Int J Stroke. 2014 Feb;9(2):240-5. doi: 10.1111/ijs.12179. Epub 2013 Sep 12.
Functional strength training in addition to conventional physical therapy could enhance upper limb recovery early after stroke more than movement performance therapy plus conventional physical therapy.
To determine (a) the relative clinical efficacy of conventional physical therapy combined with functional strength training and conventional physical therapy combined with movement performance therapy for upper limb recovery; (b) the neural correlates of response to conventional physical therapy combined with functional strength training and conventional physical therapy combined with movement performance therapy; (c) whether any one or combination of baseline measures predict motor improvement in response to conventional physical therapy combined with functional strength training or conventional physical therapy combined with movement performance therapy.
Randomized, controlled, observer-blind trial.
The sample will consist of 288 participants with upper limb paresis resulting from a stroke that occurred within the previous 60 days. All will be allocated to conventional physical therapy combined with functional strength training or conventional physical therapy combined with movement performance therapy. Functional strength training and movement performance therapy will be undertaken for up to 1·5 h/day, five-days/week for six-weeks.
Measurements will be undertaken before randomization, six-weeks thereafter, and six-months after stroke. Primary efficacy outcome will be the Action Research Arm Test. Explanatory measurements will include voxel-wise estimates of brain activity during hand movement, brain white matter integrity (fractional anisotropy), and brain-muscle connectivity (e.g. latency of motor evoked potentials). The primary clinical efficacy analysis will compare treatment groups using a multilevel normal linear model adjusting for stratification variables and for which therapist administered the treatment. Effect of conventional physical therapy combined with functional strength training versus conventional physical therapy combined with movement performance therapy will be summarized using the adjusted mean difference and 95% confidence interval. To identify the neural correlates of improvement in both groups, we will investigate associations between change from baseline in clinical outcomes and each explanatory measure. To identify baseline measurements that independently predict motor improvement, we will develop a multiple regression model.
除了常规物理疗法外,功能性力量训练可能会比运动表现疗法加常规物理疗法更能促进中风后早期上肢功能的恢复。
确定(a)常规物理疗法联合功能性力量训练与常规物理疗法联合运动表现疗法对上肢恢复的相对临床疗效;(b)常规物理疗法联合功能性力量训练与常规物理疗法联合运动表现疗法反应的神经相关性;(c)基线测量值中是否有一个或多个可以预测对常规物理疗法联合功能性力量训练或常规物理疗法联合运动表现疗法的运动改善。
随机、对照、观察者盲法试验。
样本将由 288 名上肢瘫痪的中风患者组成,这些患者在中风发生后 60 天内。所有患者将被分配到常规物理疗法联合功能性力量训练或常规物理疗法联合运动表现疗法。功能性力量训练和运动表现疗法将持续进行,每天 1.5 小时,每周 5 天,持续 6 周。
测量将在随机分组前、6 周后和中风后 6 个月进行。主要疗效结局将是动作研究上肢测试。解释性测量将包括手部运动时大脑活动的体素估计、脑白质完整性(各向异性分数)和脑-肌肉连接(例如运动诱发电位潜伏期)。主要的临床疗效分析将使用多水平正态线性模型比较治疗组,该模型调整了分层变量和治疗师实施的治疗。常规物理疗法联合功能性力量训练与常规物理疗法联合运动表现疗法的效果将使用调整后的平均差异和 95%置信区间进行总结。为了确定两组改善的神经相关性,我们将研究临床结局的基线变化与每个解释性测量之间的关联。为了确定独立预测运动改善的基线测量值,我们将开发一个多元回归模型。