Rehabilitation using virtual gaming for Hospital and hOMe-Based training for the Upper limb post Stroke (RHOMBUS II): protocol of a feasibility randomised controlled trial.
NEUROLOGY
REHABILITATION MEDICINE
Stroke
Journal
BMJ open
ISSN: 2044-6055
Titre abrégé: BMJ Open
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101552874
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
07 06 2022
07 06 2022
Historique:
entrez:
7
6
2022
pubmed:
8
6
2022
medline:
10
6
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Upper limb (UL) rehabilitation is most effective early after stroke, with higher doses leading to improved outcomes. For the stroke survivor, the repetition may be monotonous. For clinicians, providing a clinically meaningful level of input can be challenging. As such, time spent engaged in UL activity among subacute stroke survivors remains inadequate. Opportunities for the stroke survivor to engage with UL rehabilitation in a safe, accessible and engaging way are essential to improving UL outcomes following stroke. The NeuroBall is a non-immersive virtual reality (VR) digital system designed for stroke rehabilitation, specifically for the arm and hand. The aim of the Rehabilitation using virtual gaming for Hospital and hOMe-Based training for the Upper limb post Stroke study is to determine the safety, feasibility and acceptability of the NeuroBall as a rehabilitation intervention for the UL in subacute stroke. A feasibility randomised controlled trial (RCT) will compare the NeuroBall plus usual care with usual care only, in supporting UL rehabilitation over 7 weeks. Twenty-four participants in the subacute poststroke phase will be recruited while on the inpatient or early supported discharge (ESD) stroke pathway. Sixteen participants will be randomised to the intervention group and eight to the control group. Outcomes assessed at baseline and 7 weeks include gross level of disability, arm function, spasticity, pain, fatigue and quality of life (QoL). Safety will be assessed by recording adverse events and using pain, spasticity and fatigue scores. A parallel process evaluation will assess feasibility and acceptability of the intervention. Feasibility will also be determined by assessing fidelity to the intervention. Postintervention, semistructured interviews will be used to explore acceptability with 12 participants from the intervention group, four from the usual care group and with up to nine staff involved in delivering the intervention. This trial has ethical approval from Brunel University London's Research Ethics Committee 25257-NHS-Oct/2020-28121-2 and the Wales Research Ethics Committee 5 Bangor (Health and Care Research Wales) REC ref: 20/WA/0347. The study is sponsored by Brunel University London. Dr Derek Healy, Chair, University Research Ethics committee (Derek.healy@brunel.ac.uk). Trial results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals, presented at national and international conferences and distributed to people with stroke. ISRCTN11440079; Pre-results.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35672074
pii: bmjopen-2021-058905
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-058905
pmc: PMC9174817
doi:
Banques de données
ISRCTN
['ISRCTN11440079']
Types de publication
Clinical Trial Protocol
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e058905Informations de copyright
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: DAA, KB and GS-B are employed by Neurofenix (UK), a digital therapeutics company developing a therapy platform and sensor-based devices to augment rehabilitation. Neurofenix provided the Neurofenix platforms and technical support to the research therapists. Neurofenix had no influence on the design of the study, data collection, analysis and interpretation of the data or manuscript preparation.
Références
Qual Life Res. 2016 Jun;25(6):1585-96
pubmed: 26714699
NeuroRehabilitation. 2011;28(2):105-11
pubmed: 21447911
Physiother Theory Pract. 2008 Sep-Oct;24(5):372-9
pubmed: 18821443
Stroke. 2004 Jan;35(1):127-33
pubmed: 14671238
Qual Life Res. 2011 Dec;20(10):1727-36
pubmed: 21479777
Value Health. 2012 Jul-Aug;15(5):708-15
pubmed: 22867780
BMC Health Serv Res. 2017 Jan 26;17(1):88
pubmed: 28126032
Lancet Neurol. 2009 Aug;8(8):741-54
pubmed: 19608100
Scand J Rehabil Med. 1975;7(1):13-31
pubmed: 1135616
J Clin Epidemiol. 2012 Mar;65(3):301-8
pubmed: 22169081
J Gen Intern Med. 2001 Sep;16(9):606-13
pubmed: 11556941
Med Care. 2003 Nov;41(11):1284-92
pubmed: 14583691
Stroke. 2011 Aug;42(8):2276-9
pubmed: 21680905
Arch Intern Med. 2006 May 22;166(10):1092-7
pubmed: 16717171
Assist Technol. 1996;8(1):3-13
pubmed: 10159726
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013 Sep 18;13:117
pubmed: 24047204
Top Stroke Rehabil. 2011 Oct;18 Suppl 1:599-610
pubmed: 22120029
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2019 May;90(5):498-506
pubmed: 30770457
Disabil Rehabil. 2020 Nov;42(22):3237-3242
pubmed: 30951402
Int J Nurs Stud. 2011 Oct;48(10):1258-65
pubmed: 21414620
Circ Res. 2017 Feb 3;120(3):439-448
pubmed: 28154096
Int J Rehabil Res. 1981;4(4):483-92
pubmed: 7333761
Clin Rehabil. 2003 May;17(3):283-9
pubmed: 12735535
Int J Stroke. 2019 Oct;14(8):792-802
pubmed: 31658893
Stroke. 2005 Nov;36(11):2493-6
pubmed: 16224078
Int J Stroke. 2017 Jul;12(5):444-450
pubmed: 28697708
Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2015 Sep;29(8):703-13
pubmed: 25527488
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2008 Sep;89(9):1693-700
pubmed: 18760153
BMJ Open. 2018 Nov 21;8(11):e026620
pubmed: 30467137
Stud Health Technol Inform. 2019 Jul 30;263:193-204
pubmed: 31411163
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Jul 13;7:CD000443
pubmed: 28703869
Musculoskeletal Care. 2018 Dec;16(4):471-488
pubmed: 30238607
PLoS One. 2014 Feb 04;9(2):e87987
pubmed: 24505342
BMJ Open. 2019 Aug 15;9(8):e029954
pubmed: 31420394
Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2021 Apr;35(4):307-320
pubmed: 33576318
Physiotherapy. 2020 Jun;107:216-223
pubmed: 32026823
Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2001;15(3):229-37
pubmed: 11944745
Ann Intern Med. 2007 Mar 6;146(5):317-25
pubmed: 17339617