• Medientyp: E-Artikel
  • Titel: The effect of mirror therapy can be improved by simultaneous robotic assistance
  • Beteiligte: Schrader, Mareike; Sterr, Annette; Kettlitz, Robyn; Wohlmeiner, Anika; Buschfort, Rüdiger; Dohle, Christian; Bamborschke, Stephan
  • Erschienen: IOS Press, 2022
  • Erschienen in: Restorative Neurology and Neuroscience
  • Sprache: Nicht zu entscheiden
  • DOI: 10.3233/rnn-221263
  • ISSN: 1878-3627; 0922-6028
  • Schlagwörter: Neurology (clinical) ; Developmental Neuroscience ; Neurology
  • Entstehung:
  • Anmerkungen:
  • Beschreibung: <jats:p>Background: Standard mirror therapy (MT) is a well-established therapy regime for severe arm paresis after acquired brain injury. Bilateral robot-assisted mirror therapy (RMT) could be a solution to provide visual and somatosensory feedback simultaneously. Objective: The study compares the treatment effects of MT with a version of robot-assisted MT where the affected arm movement was delivered through a robotic glove (RMT). Methods: This is a parallel, randomized trial, including patients with severe arm paresis after stroke or traumatic brain injury with a Fugl-Meyer subscore hand/finger &lt; 4. Participants received either RMT or MT in individual 30 minute sessions (15 sessions within 5 weeks). Main outcome parameter was the improvement in the Fugl-Meyer Assessment upper extremity (FMA-UE) motor score. Additionally, the Motricity Index (MI) and the FMA-UE sensation test as well as a pain scale were recorded. Furthermore, patients’ and therapists’ experiences with RMT were captured through qualitative tools. Results: 24 patients completed the study. Comparison of the FMA-UE motor score difference values between the two groups revealed a significantly greater therapy effect in the RMT group than the MT group (p = 0.006). There were no significant differences for the MI (p = 0.108), the FMA-UE surface sensibility subscore (p = 0.403) as well as the FMA-UE position sense subscore (p = 0.192). In both groups the levels of pain remained stable throughout the intervention. No other adverse effects were observed. The RMT training was well accepted by patients and therapists. Conclusions: The study provides evidence that bilateral RMT achieves greater treatment benefit on motor function than conventional MT. The use of robotics seems to be a good method to implement passive co-movement in clinical practice. Our study further demonstrates that this form of training can feasibly and effectively be delivered in an inpatient setting.</jats:p>