Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
49 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2011-04-30
2016-06-30
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
In this study people with stroke will receive brain stimulation over two different areas on the side of the brain opposite to the stroke: 1) those areas responsible for movement and 2) those responsible for sensation. These experiments will test both the short and long term effects of brain stimulation on patients' learning and arm function and will allow us to identify which area of the brain best improves learning and arm function. These experiments have the potential to improve the effectiveness of rehabilitation after stroke. The proposed study is among the first to test stimulation over the side of the brain opposite to the stroke damage and at multiple sites. This unique approach may help stimulate the development of new methods for stroke rehabilitation.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Hebbian-Type Associative Stimulation in Stroke Rehabilitation
NCT07085910
Interaction Between the Brain Hemispheres - Key to Motor Recovery After Stroke
NCT06381388
Structurally Reorganizing Motor Cortex in Stroke Patients Through Hebbian-type Stimulation
NCT01569607
Modulating Interaction of Motor Learning Networks in Rehabilitation of Stroke
NCT03086551
Interhemispheric Interactions Associated With Performance of Voluntary Movements in Patients With Stroke Motor Disability
NCT00029718
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is a noninvasive method of brain stimulation. In humans, rTMS applied at high frequencies can increase cortical excitability; conversely, at low frequencies it can decrease cortical excitability. While rTMS in isolation can change cortical excitability after stroke its impact on neuroplastic change is small, likely reflecting a lack of consolidation in the absence of paired motor behaviour. Modulating the activity in a given neural network with brain stimulation prior to motor skill practice may in essence prime the system and enhance the neuroplastic effects associated with learning new motor skills. Yet to date, few studies have paired rTMS with practice of a novel motor task and assessed changes in motor function or behaviour.
Intuitively, it seems simplest to employ high frequency rTMS in the ipsilesional cortex to enhance cortical excitability. However, because of the difficulty of locating stimulation targets in the damaged hemisphere, low-frequency rTMS applied over the contralesional cortex may be the better approach. Though the direct effect of low-frequency rTMS in the human cortex is to suppress activity in the stimulated region it also indirectly enhances distant activity. Low-frequency rTMS over M1 increases cortical activity in the contralateral M1 homologue. We recently extended this finding to the primary sensory cortex (S1); demonstrating that low-frequency rTMS over left S1 increased excitability in (i.e., disinhibited) right S1. Therefore, suppressing the contralesional cortex to enhance ipsilesional cortical activity may facilitate a neural environment that is conducive for neuroplastic change.
Taken together these data suggest that inhibitory brain stimulation over the contralesional cortex, paired with skilled motor practice, may offer a new approach for stroke rehabilitation. To better understand whether this approach has merit, we propose to test two specific aims in separate experiments.
Specific Aim: To test the cumulative effects of repeated sessions that pair brain stimulation over M1c versus S1c with skilled motor practice in individuals with stroke.
We will assess hemiparetic arm motor and sensory function, motor performance/ motor skill acquisition (repeated sequence response times), cortical excitability, and neuroelectric activity in individuals with chronic sub-cortical stroke. Pre-brain stimulation measures will be compared with those obtained after 5 days of training paired with brain stimulation at a separate no-rTMS retention test to assess the cumulative effects of brain stimulation.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
DOUBLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
active cTBS
continuous theta burst stimulation
80% active motor threshold, 600 pulses
Sham cTBS
continuous theta burst stimulation
80% active motor threshold, 600 pulses
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
continuous theta burst stimulation
80% active motor threshold, 600 pulses
Other Intervention Names
Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* single, MCA territory stroke
* at least 6 months post stroke
* Fugl-Meyer (upper extremity) score of 15-55
Exclusion Criteria
* score \<24 on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment
* history of seizure/epilepsy, head trauma, major psychiatric diagnosis
* aphasic (score \<13 on Frenchay Aphasia Screen)
* contraindications to TMS/MRI
40 Years
75 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR)
OTHER_GOV
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Lara A Boyd, PT, PhD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
University of British Columbia
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
University of British Columbia
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
CIHR
Identifier Type: OTHER_GRANT
Identifier Source: secondary_id
H09-00368
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.