Movement Velocity Effect on Cortical Reorganization and Finger Function in Stroke

NCT ID: NCT01575366

Last Updated: 2019-11-01

Study Results

Results pending

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.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

PHASE1

Total Enrollment

5 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2010-02-28

Study Completion Date

2012-08-31

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

Aim 1. Determine whether higher-velocity finger tracking training improves hand function more than slower velocity training. Working hypotheses: The higher-velocity training will have significantly greater functional improvement compared to the lower-velocity training, as measured by standardized upper extremity functional tests (Jebsen Taylor test, Box \& Block Test, and Finger extension force test)

Aim 2. Ascertain whether higher-velocity finger tracking training differentially induces cortical reorganization as compared to lower-velocity finger tracking training.

Working hypotheses: The higher-velocity training will have significantly greater cortical reorganization compared to the lower-velocity training, as measured by:

1. TMS - increased amplitude of motor evoked potentials (MEP) from paretic extensor digitorum muscle in response to paired-pulse TMS to ipsilesional primary motor area (M1).
2. fMRI - increased volume of activation, signal intensity, and laterality of ipsilesional M1.

Aim 3. Explore whether the functional improvements correlate with the cortical reorganization. Working hypotheses: The functional improvements will correlate with the cortical reorganization.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Stroke

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

CROSSOVER

Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

SINGLE

Outcome Assessors

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Slow tracking training

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Tracking training

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

The paretic finger movement training at different velocities included two 5-week periods of five days per week, 2-hours per day phases. The frequency for the higher-velocity training is 0.8 Hz, whereas the lower frequency training is 4 times slower, at 0.2 Hz. The two periods are each followed by a 3-week baseline period. The subject is seated in front of a laptop computer with the paretic forearm resting on the arm of the chair in a quiet room at home. The position of the forearm is pronated. An electrogoniometer, composed of a potentiometer attached to a custom hand splint, is placed on the paretic index finger with the potentiometer centered at the metacarpophalangeal joint. To keep the training session time equal between the two training phases, the duration of each slow training trial is 5 sec, compared to 20 sec for each fast training trial. Ultimately, the total number of required finger extension/flexion training movements is equal between the two phases.

Fast tracking training

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Tracking training

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

The paretic finger movement training at different velocities included two 5-week periods of five days per week, 2-hours per day phases. The frequency for the higher-velocity training is 0.8 Hz, whereas the lower frequency training is 4 times slower, at 0.2 Hz. The two periods are each followed by a 3-week baseline period. The subject is seated in front of a laptop computer with the paretic forearm resting on the arm of the chair in a quiet room at home. The position of the forearm is pronated. An electrogoniometer, composed of a potentiometer attached to a custom hand splint, is placed on the paretic index finger with the potentiometer centered at the metacarpophalangeal joint. To keep the training session time equal between the two training phases, the duration of each slow training trial is 5 sec, compared to 20 sec for each fast training trial. Ultimately, the total number of required finger extension/flexion training movements is equal between the two phases.

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Tracking training

The paretic finger movement training at different velocities included two 5-week periods of five days per week, 2-hours per day phases. The frequency for the higher-velocity training is 0.8 Hz, whereas the lower frequency training is 4 times slower, at 0.2 Hz. The two periods are each followed by a 3-week baseline period. The subject is seated in front of a laptop computer with the paretic forearm resting on the arm of the chair in a quiet room at home. The position of the forearm is pronated. An electrogoniometer, composed of a potentiometer attached to a custom hand splint, is placed on the paretic index finger with the potentiometer centered at the metacarpophalangeal joint. To keep the training session time equal between the two training phases, the duration of each slow training trial is 5 sec, compared to 20 sec for each fast training trial. Ultimately, the total number of required finger extension/flexion training movements is equal between the two phases.

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* Ischemic stroke - due to higher risk of seizures in hemorrhagic stroke
* Subcortical location of stroke
* Stroke after 6 months - lower limit of 6 months to avoid confounding from spontaneous recovery (Jorgensen, Nakayama et al. 1995) and no upper limit to maximize pool of candidate subjects while still showing training effect (Carey, Kimberley et al. 2002)
* At least 18 years of age - to maximize pool of candidate subjects
* Mini-Mental State Examination score \>24 - to ensure satisfactory cognition to perform tasks
* Satisfactory corrected vision - to see computer screen during training and testing
* Active range of MP joint at paretic index finger of at least 10 degrees - based on minimal movement required to perform training task successfully, and that larger amplitudes would reduce the pool of subjects available for participating in the study.
* Ability to pronate the forearm so that index finger extension movement during training is vertically upward and relaxation results in the finger falling back to the flexed starting position
* not currently receiving any other therapy - to avoid confounding treatment effects
* Approval for participation by a neurologist - to ensure subject is reasonably safe to receive TMS testing. Subjects with proprioceptive loss or expressive aphasia will be included, providing they can carryout the training task.

Exclusion Criteria

* Inability to follow 3-step commands
* A visual field cut that causes subjects not to see all indicators on a computer screen positioned centrally in from of them
* History of seizures
* Family member with history of seizures
* Presence of any other neuromuscular disorders
* Pregnancy
* Claustrophobia
* Indwelling metal or medical devices/implants incompatible with functional fMRI testing
* History of exposure to finger tracking training.
* Informed consent will be obtained and TMS/fMRI safety screenings will be conducted prior to testing procedures.
* Subjects will be recruited as volunteers from letters sent to previous research subjects inviting their participation, through visits to local stroke support groups meetings, newspaper advertisements and referrals from neurologists.
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

University of Minnesota

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Responsibility Role SPONSOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Huiqiong Deng, MD, MS

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

University of Minnesota

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

University of Minnesota

Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

United States

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

0912M74993

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.

Tracking Neural Synergies After Stroke.
NCT04805866 ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING