Cleveland Clinic
Cleveland, Ohio, 44195, United States
Location status: Recruiting
Location contact
Courtney R Miller, DPT
CONTACT
Donayja Harris, BS
CONTACT
Susan M Linder, DPT, PhD
PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
NCT Number: NCT06585943
Traditional rehabilitation approaches are time and personnel intensive and costly, and leave ~75% of stroke survivors with residual disability. We propose a clinical trial to determine effects of forced aerobic exercise (FE; i.e., mechanically supplemented) in facilitating upper and lower extremity motor recovery post-stroke in an outpatient rehabilitation setting, to elucidate neural and biochemical substrates of FE-induced motor recovery, and to evaluate cost effectiveness of a FE-centered intervention compared to traditional stroke rehabilitation. The global effect of FE has the potential to enhance recovery in a growing population of stroke survivors in a cost-effective manner, thus accelerating its clinical acceptance.
Interested in participating?
Request Info18 year–85 year
All sexes
Interventional
Not applicable
Cleveland, Ohio, 44195, United States
Location status: Recruiting
Courtney R Miller, DPT
CONTACT
Donayja Harris, BS
CONTACT
Susan M Linder, DPT, PhD
PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Traditional rehabilitation approaches following stroke involve 1:1 motor learning-based training to facilitate recovery of upper extremity (UE) and lower extremity (LE) function. These time- and personnel-intensive approaches are costly, yet leave ~75% of stroke survivors with residual disability. More effective alternative approaches to facilitate motor recovery following stroke have not been adopted clinically due to excessive time and cost. To advance clinical care, both effectiveness and cost of a candidate intervention must be considered simultaneously. Aerobic exercise (AE) is known to improve cardiovascular function following stroke and central nervous system (CNS) function in older adults and neurological populations. Strong theoretical arguments suggest that AE may facilitate motor recovery following stroke. A protocol that rigorously tests this theory in the subacute stroke population is warranted. Animal studies, coupled with our preliminary data, indicate a specific type of exercise - forced aerobic exercise (FE), where volitional movements are mechanically supplemented - improves motor recovery following stroke. The mechanical assistance provided by FE enables patients to achieve a more rapid and consistent exercise pattern beyond their volitional capabilities while maintaining their aerobic effort within a beneficial range. In our initial studies, persons completing FE cycling followed by a reduced dose of UE motor task practice exhibited greater recovery of UE motor function compared to those completing unassisted AE and motor task practice or extended sessions of motor task practice alone. Animal studies have shown that FE triggers the release of brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) and insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1), thought to be critical building blocks for neuroplasticity. Project Hypothesis: FE facilitates high-intensity AE, which triggers growth factors essential for neuroplasticity, thereby 'priming' the CNS to facilitate motor recovery associated with motor retraining therapies. We propose a prospective, pragmatic clinical trial to determine effects of FE in facilitating UE and LE motor recovery post-stroke in an outpatient rehabilitation setting, to elucidate neural and biochemical substrates of FE-induced motor recovery, and to evaluate cost effectiveness of a FE-centered intervention compared to traditional stroke rehabilitation.
Aim 1: Determine effects of FE+rehab vs. time-matched rehab on the recovery of UE motor function.
Aim 2: Determine effects of FE+rehab vs. time-matched rehab on recovery of lower extremity motor function.
Aim 3: Determine effects of FE+rehab vs. rehab on electrophysiological and biochemical markers of neuroplasticity.
Aim 4: Evaluate cost-effectiveness of FE+rehab vs. rehab. The global effect of FE has the potential to enhance recovery in a growing population of stroke survivors in a cost-effective manner, thus accelerating its clinical acceptance. Our mechanistic aim will elucidate the effects of each approach on substrates underlying neuroplasticity.
Healthy volunteers accepted: No
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Sixty-six individuals with chronic stroke able to provide informed consent who meet the following criteria for inclusion will be recruited from the Cleveland Clinic:
Exclusion criteria
include:
The FE+rehab group (N=33) will complete FE on the cycle designed to augment pedaling rate to >75 RPM. Target heart rate zone will be set to 60-80% of HR reserve. The session will consist of a 5-min warm-up, 35-min main exercise set, and 5-min cool down. Following FE, abbreviated sessions of motor learning-based training will be administered by a neurologic OT and PT experienced in stroke rehabilitation, with 30 min focused on restoration of UE function (OT) and 15 min focused on LE motor function/ gait training (PT).
The rehab group will receive consecutive, full-length sessions of motor learning-based training, administered by a neurologic OT and PT experienced in stroke rehabilitation, with 45 min focused on restoration of UE function (OT) and 45 min focused on LE motor function/ gait training (PT).
Time frame: Baseline to end of treatment at 12 weeks and end of treatment + 6 months
Impairment-based measure of the upper extremity post-stroke.
Time frame: Baseline to end of treatment at 12 weeks and end of treatment + 6 months
Gait velocity obtained using motion capture.
Time frame: Before and after first and 24th treatment session
Blood biomarker for neuroplasticity
Time frame: Before and after first and 24th treatment session
Blood biomarker for neuroplasticity
Time frame: Baseline and end of treatment at 12 weeks
Electroencephalograms will be obtained to determine the degree of active engagement of different cortical areas during active/passive UE and LE movements
Time frame: Baseline and end of treatment at 12 weeks
Electroencephalograms will be obtained to determine the degree of active engagement of different cortical areas under each cycling condition
Time frame: Baseline and end of treatment at 12 weeks
Electroencephalograms will be obtained to quantify inter-area communication and direction of information flow.
Time frame: baseline to end of treatment at 12 weeks and baseline to end of treatment + 6 months
Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) expressed as cost per quality of life years (QALY) will be computed using a healthcare perspective.
Time frame: Baseline to end of treatment at 12 weeks and end of treatment + 6 months
Self-reported quality of life measure, normalized to a score from 0-100 with higher scores indicative of better self-reported quality of life
Time frame: Baseline to end of treatment at 12 weeks and end of treatment + 6 months
Measure of upper extremity gross and fine motor function post-stroke
Time frame: Baseline to end of treatment at 12 weeks and end of treatment + 6 months
Force tracking task - accuracy within targeted range
Time frame: Baseline to end of treatment at 12 weeks and end of treatment + 6 months
maximum grasp force measured with force transducer
Time frame: Baseline to end of treatment at 12 weeks and end of treatment + 6 months
Time to complete task when separating 2 force transducers
Time frame: Baseline to end of treatment at 12 weeks and end of treatment + 6 months
Measure of walking capacity
Time frame: Baseline to end of treatment at 12 weeks and end of treatment + 6 months
Impairment-based measure of the lower extremity post-stroke.
Time frame: Baseline, end of treatment at 12 weeks, end of treatment + 6 months
Biomechanical assessment of the following spatio-temporal components of gait using motion capture: % of gait cycle spent in swing and stance phases, and in single and double limb support.
Time frame: Baseline, end of treatment at 12 weeks, end of treatment + 6 months
Biomechanical assessment of gait cadence (steps/minute)
Time frame: Baseline, end of treatment at 12 weeks, end of treatment + 6 months
Biomechanical assessment of stride length
Time frame: Baseline, end of treatment at 12 weeks, end of treatment + 6 months
Biomechanical assessment of the following components of gait kinetics using motion capture: 1) peak anterior-posterior propulsion forces, 2) peak anterior-posterior braking forces, 3) peak vertical ground reaction forces, 4) peak lateral ground reaction forces.
Time frame: Baseline, end of treatment at 12 weeks, end of treatment + 6 months
Biomechanical assessment of the following components of gait kinetics using motion capture: 1) total hip extension moment 2) total knee extension moment, 3) total ankle plantarflexion extension moment
Time frame: Baseline, end of treatment at 12 weeks, end of treatment + 6 months
Biomechanical assessment of the following components of gait kinetics during stance phase using motion capture: 1) total hip extension power 2) total knee extension power, 3) total ankle plantarflexion extension power
Time frame: Baseline, end of treatment at 12 weeks, end of treatment + 6 months
Biomechanical assessment of the following kinematic components of gait using motion capture: hip flexion/extension, knee flexion/extension, ankle plantar- and dorsi-flexion
Time frame: Before and after first and 24th session
Blood biomarker for neuroplasticity
Time frame: Baseline
lower extremity somatosensory evoked potentials
Time frame: Baseline to end of treatment at 12 weeks and end of treatment + 6 months
Measure of disability
Time frame: Baseline to end of treatment at 12 weeks
Measure of cardiorespiratory function
Time frame: Baseline to end of treatment at 12 weeks and end of treatment + 6 months
Self-reported quality of life measure of physical function computed as normalized T-scores (1-100 range), with higher scores indicative of greater self-reported quality of life
Time frame: Baseline to end of treatment at 12 weeks and end of treatment + 6 months
Self-reported quality of life measure computed as a normalized T-score (0-100 range), with higher scores indicative of greater self-reported participation
Contact information is provided by the study sponsor or research team.
Courtney Miller, PT, DPT
CONTACT
Donayja Harris, BS
CONTACT
The Cleveland Clinic
Other
The I-Score (Intensive Stroke Cycling for Optimal Recovery and Economic Value) Trial
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.
Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.
NCT06615973
Brain Disease, Brain Diseases
Bethesda, Maryland, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT07737431
Brain Diseases, Cardiovascular Diseases
Hung Hom, Kowloon, Hong Kong
View Trial DetailsNCT05378035
Arrhythmias, Cardiac, Arterial Thromboembolism
Hong Kong
View Trial DetailsNCT03821129
Brain Diseases, Cardiovascular Abnormalities
Tucson, Arizona, United States
View Trial Details