Inaccurate Use of the Upper Extremity Fugl-Meyer Negatively Affects Upper Extremity Rehabilitation Trial Design: Findings From the ICARE Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the extent to which estimates of sample and effect size in stroke rehabilitation trials can be affected by simple summation of ordinal Upper Extremity Fugl-Meyer (UEFM) items compared with a Rasch-rescaled UEFM. DESIGN: Rasch analysis of Interdisciplinary Comprehensive Arm Rehabilitation Evaluation (ICARE) phase III trial data, comparing 3 upper extremity (UE) motor treatments in stroke survivors enrolled 45.8±22.4 days poststroke. Participants underwent a structured UE motor training known as the Accelerated Skill Acquisition Program, usual and customary care, or dose-equivalent care. UEFM data from baseline, postintervention, and 6 and 12 months later were included for analysis. SETTING: Outpatient stroke rehabilitation. PARTICIPANTS: ICARE participants (N=361). INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Item difficulties, person abilities, and sample size. RESULTS: Because of their ordinality, summed raw UEFM scores measured motor impairment inconsistently across different ranges of stroke severity relative to the rescaled UEFM. In the full ICARE sample, raw UEFM understated scores relative to the rescaled UEFM by 7.4 points for the most severely impaired, but overstated scores by up to 8.4 points toward the ceiling. As a result, 50.9% of all UEFM observations showed a residual error greater than 10% of the total UEFM score. Relative to the raw scores, the rescaled UEFM improved the effect size of change in motor impairment between baseline and 1 year (d=0.35). For a hypothetical 3-arm trial resembling ICARE, UEFM rescaling reduced the required sample size by 32% (n=108) compared with raw UEFM (n=159). CONCLUSIONS: In UE rehabilitation trials, a rescaled UEFM potentially decreases sample size by one-third, decreasing costs, duration, and the number of subjects exposed to experimental risks. This benefit is obtained through increased measurement efficiency. Reductions in ceiling effects are also possible. These findings apply to ICARE-like trials. Confirmatory validation in another phase III trial is needed.

Reduced Upper Limb Recovery in Subcortical Stroke Patients With Small Prior Radiographic Stroke.

Background: Research imaging costs limit lesion-based analyses in already expensive large stroke rehabilitation trials. Despite the belief that lesion characteristics influence recovery and treatment response, prior studies have not sufficiently addressed whether lesion features are an important consideration in motor rehabilitation trial design. Objective: Using clinically-obtained neuroimaging, evaluate how lesion characteristics relate to upper extremity (UE) recovery and response to therapy in a large UE rehabilitation trial. Methods: We reviewed lesions from 297 participants with mild-moderate motor impairment in the Interdisciplinary Comprehensive Arm Rehabilitation Evaluation (ICARE) study and their association with motor recovery, measured by the UE Fugl-Meyer (UE-FM). Significant lesion features identified on correlational and bivariate analysis were further analyzed for associations with recovery and therapy response using longitudinal mixed models. Results: Prior radiographic stroke was associated with less recovery on UE-FM in participants with motor impairment from subsequent subcortical stroke (-5.8 points) and in the overall sample (-3.6 points), but not in participants with cortical or mixed lesions. Lesion volume was also associated with less recovery, particularly after subcortical stroke. Every decade increase in age was associated with 1 less point of recovery on UE-FM. Response to specific treatment regimens varied based on lesion characteristics. Subcortical stroke patients experienced slightly less recovery with higher doses of upper extremity task-oriented training. Participants with cortical or mixed lesions experienced more recovery with higher doses of usual and customary therapy. Other imaging features (leukoaraiosis, ischemic vs. hemorrhagic stroke) were not significant. Conclusions: ICARE clinical imaging revealed information useful for UE motor trial design: stratification of persons with and without prior radiographic stroke may be required in participants with subcortical stroke, the majority of motor rehabilitation trial participants. Most of the prior radiographic strokes were small and cortically-based, suggesting even minor prior brain injury remote to the acute stroke lesion may limit spontaneous and therapy-related recovery. Lesion location may be associated with response to different therapy regimens, but the effects are variable and of unclear significance.

Accelerating Stroke Recovery: Body Structures and Functions, Activities, Participation, and Quality of Life Outcomes From a Large Rehabilitation Trial.

BACKGROUND: Task-oriented therapies have been developed to address significant upper extremity disability that persists after stroke. Yet, the extent of and approach to rehabilitation and recovery remains unsatisfactory to many. OBJECTIVE: To compare a skill-directed investigational intervention with usual care treatment for body functions and structures, activities, participation, and quality of life outcomes. METHODS: On average, 46 days poststroke, 361 patients were randomized to 1 of 3 outpatient therapy groups: a patient-centered Accelerated Skill Acquisition Program (ASAP), dose-equivalent usual occupational therapy (DEUCC), or usual therapy (UCC). Outcomes were taken at baseline, posttreatment, 6 months, and 1 year after randomization. Longitudinal mixed effect models compared group differences in poststroke improvement during treatment and follow-up phases. RESULTS: Across all groups, most improvement occurred during the treatment phase, followed by change more slowly during follow-up. Compared with DEUCC and UCC, ASAP group gains were greater during treatment for Stroke Impact Scale Hand, Strength, Mobility, Physical Function, and Participation scores, self-efficacy, perceived health, reintegration, patient-centeredness, and quality of life outcomes. ASAP participants reported higher Motor Activity Log-28 Quality of Movement than UCC posttreatment and perceived greater study-related improvements in quality of life. By end of study, all groups reached similar levels with only limited group differences. CONCLUSIONS: Customized task-oriented training can be implemented to accelerate gains across a full spectrum of patient-reported outcomes. While group differences for most outcomes disappeared at 1 year, ASAP participants achieved these outcomes on average 8 months earlier (ClinicalTrials.gov: Interdisciplinary Comprehensive Arm Rehabilitation Evaluation [ICARE] Stroke Initiative, at www.ClinicalTrials.gov/ClinicalTrials.gov . Identifier: NCT00871715).

Stroke Lesions in a Large Upper Limb Rehabilitation Trial Cohort Rarely Match Lesions in Common Preclinical Models.

BACKGROUND: Stroke patients with mild-moderate upper extremity motor impairments and minimal sensory and cognitive deficits provide a useful model to study recovery and improve rehabilitation. Laboratory-based investigators use lesioning techniques for similar goals. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether stroke lesions in an upper extremity rehabilitation trial cohort match lesions from the preclinical stroke recovery models used to drive translational research. METHODS: Clinical neuroimages from 297 participants enrolled in the Interdisciplinary Comprehensive Arm Rehabilitation Evaluation (ICARE) study were reviewed. Images were characterized based on lesion type (ischemic or hemorrhagic), volume, vascular territory, depth (cortical gray matter, cortical white matter, subcortical), old strokes, and leukoaraiosis. Lesions were compared with those of preclinical stroke models commonly used to study upper limb recovery. RESULTS: Among the ischemic stroke participants, median infarct volume was 1.8 mL, with most lesions confined to subcortical structures (61%) including the anterior choroidal artery territory (30%) and the pons (23%). Of ICARE participants, <1% had lesions resembling proximal middle cerebral artery or surface vessel occlusion models. Preclinical models of subcortical white matter injury best resembled the ICARE population (33%). Intracranial hemorrhage participants had small (median 12.5 mL) lesions that best matched the capsular hematoma preclinical model. CONCLUSIONS: ICARE subjects are not representative of all stroke patients, but they represent a clinically and scientifically important subgroup. Compared with lesions in general stroke populations and widely studied animal models of recovery, ICARE participants had smaller, more subcortically based strokes. Improved preclinical-clinical translational efforts may require better alignment of lesions between preclinical and human stroke recovery models.

Effect of a Task-Oriented Rehabilitation Program on Upper Extremity Recovery Following Motor Stroke: The ICARE Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Clinical trials suggest that higher doses of task-oriented training are superior to current clinical practice for patients with stroke with upper extremity motor deficits. OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of a structured, task-oriented motor training program vs usual and customary occupational therapy (UCC) during stroke rehabilitation. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Phase 3, pragmatic, single-blind randomized trial among 361 participants with moderate motor impairment recruited from 7 US hospitals over 44 months, treated in the outpatient setting from June 2009 to March 2014. INTERVENTIONS: Structured, task-oriented upper extremity training (Accelerated Skill Acquisition Program [ASAP]; n = 119); dose-equivalent occupational therapy (DEUCC; n = 120); or monitoring-only occupational therapy (UCC; n = 122). The DEUCC group was prescribed 30 one-hour sessions over 10 weeks; the UCC group was only monitored, without specification of dose. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was 12-month change in log-transformed Wolf Motor Function Test time score (WMFT, consisting of a mean of 15 timed arm movements and hand dexterity tasks). Secondary outcomes were change in WMFT time score (minimal clinically important difference [MCID] = 19 seconds) and proportion of patients improving ≥25 points on the Stroke Impact Scale (SIS) hand function score (MCID = 17.8 points). RESULTS: Among the 361 randomized patients (mean age, 60.7 years; 56% men; 42% African American; mean time since stroke onset, 46 days), 304 (84%) completed the 12-month primary outcome assessment; in intention-to-treat analysis, mean group change scores (log WMFT, baseline to 12 months) were, for the ASAP group, 2.2 to 1.4 (difference, 0.82); DEUCC group, 2.0 to 1.2 (difference, 0.84); and UCC group, 2.1 to 1.4 (difference, 0.75), with no significant between-group differences (ASAP vs DEUCC: 0.14; 95% CI, -0.05 to 0.33; P = .16; ASAP vs UCC: -0.01; 95% CI, -0.22 to 0.21; P = .94; and DEUCC vs UCC: -0.14; 95% CI, -0.32 to 0.05; P = .15). Secondary outcomes for the ASAP group were WMFT change score, -8.8 seconds, and improved SIS, 73%; DEUCC group, WMFT, -8.1 seconds, and SIS, 72%; and UCC group, WMFT, -7.2 seconds, and SIS, 69%, with no significant pairwise between-group differences (ASAP vs DEUCC: WMFT, 1.8 seconds; 95% CI, -0.8 to 4.5 seconds; P = .18; improved SIS, 1%; 95% CI, -12% to 13%; P = .54; ASAP vs UCC: WMFT, -0.6 seconds, 95% CI, -3.8 to 2.6 seconds; P = .72; improved SIS, 4%; 95% CI, -9% to 16%; P = .48; and DEUCC vs UCC: WMFT, -2.1 seconds; 95% CI, -4.5 to 0.3 seconds; P = .08; improved SIS, 3%; 95% CI, -9% to 15%; P = .22). A total of 168 serious adverse events occurred in 109 participants, resulting in 8 patients withdrawing from the study. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among patients with motor stroke and primarily moderate upper extremity impairment, use of a structured, task-oriented rehabilitation program did not significantly improve motor function or recovery beyond either an equivalent or a lower dose of UCC upper extremity rehabilitation. These findings do not support superiority of this program among patients with motor stroke and primarily moderate upper extremity impairment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00871715.

Interrater reliability of the Wolf Motor Function Test-Functional Ability Scale: why it matters.

BACKGROUND: One important objective for clinical trialists in rehabilitation is determining efficacy of interventions to enhance motor behavior. In part, limitation in the precision of measurement presents a challenge. The few valid, low-cost observational tools available to assess motor behavior cannot escape the variability inherent in test administration and scoring. This is especially true when there are multiple evaluators and raters, as in the case of multisite randomized controlled trials (RCTs). One way to enhance reliability and reduce variability is to implement rigorous quality control (QC) procedures. OBJECTIVE: This article describes a systematic QC process used to refine the administration and scoring procedures for the Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT)-Functional Ability Scale (FAS). METHODS: The QC process, a systematic focus-group collaboration, was developed and used for a phase III RCT, which enlisted multiple evaluators and an experienced WMFT-FAS rater panel. RESULTS: After 3 staged refinements to the administration and scoring instructions, we achieved a sufficiently high interrater reliability (weighted κ = 0.8). CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: A systematic focus-group process was shown to be an effective method to improve reliability of observational assessment tools for motor behavior in neurorehabilitation. A reduction in noise-related variability in performance assessments will increase power and potentially lower the number needed to treat. Improved precision of measurement can lead to more cost-effective and efficient clinical trials. Finally, we suggest that improved precision in measures of motor behavior may provide more insight into recovery mechanisms than a single measure of movement time alone.

Interdisciplinary Comprehensive Arm Rehabilitation Evaluation (ICARE): a randomized controlled trial protocol.

BACKGROUND: Residual disability after stroke is substantial; 65% of patients at 6 months are unable to incorporate the impaired upper extremity into daily activities. Task-oriented training programs are rapidly being adopted into clinical practice. In the absence of any consensus on the essential elements or dose of task-specific training, an urgent need exists for a well-designed trial to determine the effectiveness of a specific multidimensional task-based program governed by a comprehensive set of evidence-based principles. The Interdisciplinary Comprehensive Arm Rehabilitation Evaluation (ICARE) Stroke Initiative is a parallel group, three-arm, single blind, superiority randomized controlled trial of a theoretically-defensible, upper extremity rehabilitation program provided in the outpatient setting.The primary objective of ICARE is to determine if there is a greater improvement in arm and hand recovery one year after randomization in participants receiving a structured training program termed Accelerated Skill Acquisition Program (ASAP), compared to participants receiving usual and customary therapy of an equivalent dose (DEUCC). Two secondary objectives are to compare ASAP to a true (active monitoring only) usual and customary (UCC) therapy group and to compare DEUCC and UCC. METHODS/DESIGN: Following baseline assessment, participants are randomized by site, stratified for stroke duration and motor severity. 360 adults will be randomized, 14 to 106 days following ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke onset, with mild to moderate upper extremity impairment, recruited at sites in Atlanta, Los Angeles and Washington, D.C. The Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT) time score is the primary outcome at 1 year post-randomization. The Stroke Impact Scale (SIS) hand domain is a secondary outcome measure.The design includes concealed allocation during recruitment, screening and baseline, blinded outcome assessment and intention to treat analyses. Our primary hypothesis is that the improvement in log-transformed WMFT time will be greater for the ASAP than the DEUCC group. This pre-planned hypothesis will be tested at a significance level of 0.05. DISCUSSION: ICARE will test whether ASAP is superior to the same number of hours of usual therapy. Pre-specified secondary analyses will test whether 30 hours of usual therapy is superior to current usual and customary therapy not controlled for dose. TRIAL REGISTRATION: www.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00871715