Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT02548234

Effect of Mirror Therapy Versus Bilateral Arm Training for Rehabilitation After Chronic Stroke

The study purpose is to compare the efficacy of mirror therapy and bilateral arm training on movement strategies of the affected upper extremity and functional outcome in chronic stroke patients.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Conditions

Stroke Brain Diseases Cardiovascular Diseases Central Nervous System Diseases Cerebrovascular Disorders Nervous System Diseases Vascular Diseases

Age range

21 year and older

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

China Medical University Hospital

Taichung, 404, Taiwan

About this study

Study background: Approximately 80% of stroke survivors have an upper and/or lower limb impairment (Barker 1997), and impairment of the arm explains up to 50% of the variance in functional limitation after stroke. Brain imaging research using magnetoencephalography found that mirror therapy combined with bilateral arm training could potentially aid stroke rehabilitation by normalizing an asymmetrical pattern of movement-related beta desynchronization in primary motor cortex. However, different neural mechanisms may cause different effect of motor control recovery after the two different approaches, which have yet to be studied. Study purpose：To compare the efficacy of mirror therapy and bilateral arm training on movement strategies of the affected upper extremity and functional outcome in chronic stroke patients. Study method: This was a single-blind, randomized, comparative efficacy research. Sixty participants with chronic stroke will be recruited in the occupational therapy clinics at four hospitals and randomly assigned to the mirror therapy and bilateral arm training groups. The intervention will consist of 1.5 hrs/day, 5 days/wk for 4 wks, including 3 days of hospital-based therapy and 5 days of home practice. Primary outcomes were muscular properties (grip strength) and sensorimotor measurements. Secondary outcomes included measures of daily functions to gain insight about movement capabilities. The validity and reliability of all measurements have been proposed. Finally, the Mann-Whitney U test and the Fisher exact test will be used to compare the significant differences between the two approaches. The effect size of dependent variables will be reported also.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • more than 6 months after onset of an ischemic or hemorrhage stroke
  • no excessive spasticity on all joints of the affected arm

Exclusion criteria

  • history of stroke or other neurologic, neuromuscular, or orthopedic disease
  • participation in other experimental rehabilitation or drug studies concurrent with this study

Treatment and study plan

Mirror Therapy

Other

Mirror therapy group received training for 1.5 hours/day, 3 days/week, for 4 weeks and home programs for 30-40 min/day, 5 days/week.

Bilateral arm training

Other

Bilateral arm training group received training for 1.5 hours/day, 3 days/week, for 4 weeks and home programs for 30-40 min/day, 5 days/week.

Primary outcomes

  1. The efficacy of mirror therapy versus bilateral arm training on sensorimotor functions

    Time frame: within four weeks (plus or minus 3 days) after intervention

    Revised Nottingham Sensory Assessment and Fugl-Meyer Assessment will be used to measure sensorimotor functions. The statistical analysis will be performed to compare the significant differences for the efficacy of mirror therapy versus bilateral arm training.

Secondary outcomes

  1. The efficacy of mirror therapy versus bilateral arm training on motor performance

    Time frame: within four weeks (plus or minus 3 days) after intervention

    The Chedoke Arm and Hand Activity Inventory (CAHAI) will be used to measure arm and hand functions on real-life bilateral tasks. The statistical analysis will be performed to compare the significant differences for the efficacy of mirror therapy versus bilateral arm training on motor performance.

  2. The efficacy of mirror therapy versus bilateral arm training on motor performance

    Time frame: within four weeks (plus or minus 3 days) after intervention

    Motor Activity Log (MAL) will be used to measure self-perceived real-world use. The statistical analysis will be performed to compare the significant differences for the efficacy of mirror therapy versus bilateral arm training.

  3. The efficacy of mirror therapy versus bilateral arm training on quality of life

    Time frame: within four weeks (plus or minus 3 days) after intervention

    Stroke Impact Scale Version 3.0 (SIS) will be used to measure patient reported quality of life and multidimensional stroke recovery. The statistical analysis will be performed to compare the significant differences for the efficacy of mirror therapy versus bilateral arm training.

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

China Medical University Hospital

Other

Registry information

Official study title

Effect of Mirror Therapy Versus Bilateral Arm Training for Rehabilitation After Chronic Stroke: a Pilot Randomized-controlled Trial

Important dates

Study start
2015
Primary completion
2017
Study completion
2017
First posted
Sep 14, 2015
Registry last updated
Sep 3, 2020

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Related clinical trials

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.