Additional, Mechanized Upper Limb Self-Rehabilitation in Patients With Subacute Stroke: The REM-AVC Randomized Trial.

Background and Purpose: Additional therapy may improve poststroke outcomes. Self-rehabilitation is a useful means to increase rehabilitation time. Mechanized systems are usual means to extend time for motor training. The primary aim was to compare the effects of self-rehabilitation using a mechanized device with control self-exercises on upper extremity impairment in patients with stroke. Methods: Phase III, parallel, concealed allocation, randomized controlled, multicenter trial, with 12-month follow-up. Patients aged 18 to 80 years, 3 weeks to 3 months poststroke with a Fugl-Meyer Assessment score of 10 to 40 points, were randomized to the Exo or control groups. All undertook two 30-minute self-rehabilitation sessions/day, 5 days/wk for 4 weeks in addition to usual rehabilitation. The Exo group performed games-based exercises using a gravity-supported mechanical exoskeleton (Armeo Spring). The control group performed stretching plus basic active exercises. Primary outcome was change in upper extremity Fugl-Meyer Assessment score at 4 weeks. Results: Two hundred fifteen participants were randomly allocated to the Exo group (107) or the control group (108). Mean age (SD), 58.3 (13.6) years; mean time poststroke, 54.8 (22.1) days; and mean baseline Fugl-Meyer Assessment score, 26.1 (9.5). There was no between-group difference in mean change in Fugl-Meyer Assessment score following the intervention: 13.3 (9.0) in the Exo group and 11.8 (8.8) in the control group (P=0.22). There were no significant between-group differences in changes for any of the other outcomes at any time point (except for perception of the self-rehabilitation). There was no between-group difference in cost utility at 12 months. Conclusions: In patients with moderate-to-severe impairment in the subacute phase of stroke, the purchase and use of complex devices to provide additional upper limb training may not be necessary: simply educating patients to regularly move and stretch their limbs appears sufficient. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01383512.

What Do Eye Gaze Metrics Tell Us about Motor Imagery?

Many of the brain structures involved in performing real movements also have increased activity during imagined movements or during motor observation, and this could be the neural substrate underlying the effects of motor imagery in motor learning or motor rehabilitation. In the absence of any objective physiological method of measurement, it is currently impossible to be sure that the patient is indeed performing the task as instructed. Eye gaze recording during a motor imagery task could be a possible way to "spy" on the activity an individual is really engaged in. The aim of the present study was to compare the pattern of eye movement metrics during motor observation, visual and kinesthetic motor imagery (VI, KI), target fixation, and mental calculation. Twenty-two healthy subjects (16 females and 6 males), were required to perform tests in five conditions using imagery in the Box and Block Test tasks following the procedure described by Liepert et al. Eye movements were analysed by a non-invasive oculometric measure (SMI RED250 system). Two parameters describing gaze pattern were calculated: the index of ocular mobility (saccade duration over saccade + fixation duration) and the number of midline crossings (i.e. the number of times the subjects gaze crossed the midline of the screen when performing the different tasks). Both parameters were significantly different between visual imagery and kinesthesic imagery, visual imagery and mental calculation, and visual imagery and target fixation. For the first time we were able to show that eye movement patterns are different during VI and KI tasks. Our results suggest gaze metric parameters could be used as an objective unobtrusive approach to assess engagement in a motor imagery task. Further studies should define how oculomotor parameters could be used as an indicator of the rehabilitation task a patient is engaged in.