Real-time auditory feedback may reduce abnormal movements in patients with chronic stroke.

PURPOSE: The current pilot study assesses the use of real-time auditory feedback to help reduce abnormal movements during an active reaching task in patients with chronic stroke. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 20 patients with chronic stroke completed the study with full datasets (age: M = 53 SD = 14; sex: male = 75%; time since stroke in months: M = 34, SD = 33). Patients undertook 100 repetitions of an active reaching task while listening to self-selected music which automatically muted when abnormal movement was detected, determined by thresholds set by clinical therapists. A within-subject design with two conditions (with auditory feedback vs. without auditory feedback) presented in a randomised counterbalanced order was used. The dependent variable was the duration of abnormal movement as a proportion of trial duration. RESULTS: A significant reduction in the duration of abnormal movement was observed when patients received auditory feedback, F(1,18) = 9.424, p = 0.007, with a large effect size (partial η2 = 0.344). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with chronic stroke can make use of real-time auditory feedback to increase the proportion of time they spend in optimal movement patterns. The approach provides a motivating framework that encourages high dose with a key focus on quality of movement. Trial Registration: ISRCTN12969079 https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN12969079 ISRTCN trial registration REF: ISRCTN12969079IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONMovement quality during upper limb rehabilitation should be targeted as part of a well-balanced rehabilitation programme.Auditory feedback is a useful tool to help patients with chronic stroke reduce compensatory movements.

Differences in outcomes following an intensive upper-limb rehabilitation program for patients with common central nervous system-acting drug prescriptions.

Background: Difficulty using the upper-limb is a major barrier to independence for many patients post-stroke or brain injury. High dose rehabilitation can result in clinically significant improvements in function even years after the incident; however, there is still high variability in patient responsiveness to such interventions that cannot be explained by age, sex, or time since stroke. Methods: This retrospective study investigated whether patients prescribed certain classes of central nervous system-acting drugs-γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA) agonists, antiepileptics, and antidepressants-differed in their outcomes on the three-week intensive Queen Square Upper-Limb program. For 277 stroke or brain injury patients (167 male, median age 52 years (IQR: 21), median time since incident 20 months (IQR: 26)) upper-limb impairment and activity was assessed at admission to the program and at six months post-discharge, using the upper limb component of the Fugl-Meyer, Action Research Arm Test, and Chedoke Arm and Hand Activity Inventory. Drug prescriptions were obtained from primary care physicians at referral. Specification curve analysis was used to protect against selective reporting results and add robustness to the conclusions of this retrospective study. Results: Patients with GABA agonist prescriptions had significantly worse upper-limb scores at admission but no evidence for a significant difference in program-induced improvements was found. Additionally, no evidence of significant differences in patients with or without antiepileptic drug prescriptions on either admission to, or improvement on, the program was found in this study. Although no evidence was found for differences in admission scores, patients with antidepressant prescriptions experienced reduced improvement in upper-limb function, even when accounting for anxiety and depression scores. Conclusions: These results demonstrate that, when prescribed typically, there was no evidence that patients prescribed GABA agonists performed worse on this high-intensity rehabilitation program. Patients prescribed antidepressants, however, performed poorer than expected on the Queen Square Upper-Limb rehabilitation program. While the reasons for these differences are unclear, identifying these patients prior to admission may allow for better accommodation of differences in their rehabilitation needs.

Pushing the limits of recovery in chronic stroke survivors: a descriptive qualitative study of users perceptions of the Queen Square Upper Limb Neurorehabilitation Programme.

INTRODUCTION: The Queen Square Upper Limb (QSUL) Neurorehabilitation Programme is a clinical service within the National Health Service in the UK that provides 90-hours of therapy over 3-weeks to stroke survivors with persistent upper limb impairment. This study aimed to explore the perceptions of participants of this programme, including clinicians, stroke survivors and caregivers. DESIGN: Descriptive qualitative. Data analysis was performed using a conventional thematic content approach to identify main themes by four researchers to avoid any potential bias or personal motivations, promoting confirmability. SETTING: Clinical outpatient neurorehabilitation service. PARTICIPANTS: Clinicians (physiotherapists, occupational therapists, rehabilitation assistants) involved in the delivery of the QSUL Programme, as well as stroke survivors and caregivers who had participated in the programme were purposively sampled. Each focus group followed a series of semi-structured, open questions that were tailored to the clinical or stroke group. One independent researcher facilitated all focus groups, which were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim by a professional transcription agency. RESULTS: Four focus groups were completed: three including stroke survivors (n=16) and caregivers (n=2), and one including clinicians (n=11). The main stroke survivor themes related to psychosocial aspects of the programme ('you feel valued as an individual'), as well as the behavioural training provided ('gruelling, yet rewarding'). The main clinician themes also included psychosocial aspects of the programme ('patient driven ethos-no barriers, no rules') and knowledge, skills and resources of clinicians ('it is more than intensity, it is complex'). CONCLUSIONS: As an intervention, stroke survivors and clinicians consider the QSUL Programme to be both comprehensive and complex. The nature of the interventions in the programme spans psychosocial and behavioural domains. We suggest the future clinical trials of upper limb rehabilitation consider testing the efficacy of these multiple interacting components.

Intensive upper limb neurorehabilitation in chronic stroke: outcomes from the Queen Square programme.

OBJECTIVE: Persistent difficulty in using the upper limb remains a major contributor to physical disability post-stroke. There is a nihilistic view about what clinically relevant changes are possible after the early post-stroke phase. The Queen Square Upper Limb Neurorehabilitation programme delivers high-quality, high-dose, high-intensity upper limb neurorehabilitation during a 3-week (90 hours) programme. Here, we report clinical changes made by the chronic stroke patients treated on the programme, factors that might predict responsiveness to therapy and the relationship between changes in impairment and activity. METHODS: Upper limb impairment and activity were assessed on admission, discharge, 6 weeks and 6 months after treatment, with modified upper limb Fugl-Meyer (FM-UL, max-54), Action Research Arm Test (ARAT, max-57) and Chedoke Arm and Hand Activity Inventory (CAHAI, max-91). Patient-reported outcome measures were recorded with the Arm Activity Measure (ArmA) parts A (0-32) and B (0-52), where lower scores are better. RESULTS: 224 patients (median time post-stroke 18 months) completed the 6-month programme. Median scores on admission were as follows: FM-UL = 26 (IQR 16-37), ARAT=18 (IQR 7-33), CAHAI=40 (28-55), ArmA-A=8 (IQR 4.5-12) and ArmA-B=38 (IQR 24-46). The median scores 6 months after the programme were as follows: FM-UL=37 (IQR 24-48), ARAT=27 (IQR 12-45), CAHAI=52 (IQR 35-77), ArmA-A=3 (IQR 1-6.5) and ArmA-B=19 (IQR 8.5-32). We found no predictors of treatment response beyond admission scores. CONCLUSION: With intensive upper limb rehabilitation, chronic stroke patients can change by clinically important differences in measures of impairment and activity. Crucially, clinical gains continued during the 6-month follow-up period.