Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation (Jan 2022)

Comparative effects of EMG-driven robot-assisted therapy versus task-oriented training on motor and daily function in patients with stroke: a randomized cross-over trial

  • Yen-Wei Chen,
  • Wei-Chi Chiang,
  • Chia-Ling Chang,
  • Shih-Ming Lo,
  • Ching-Yi Wu

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-021-00961-w
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 19, no. 1
pp. 1 – 9

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background Robot-assisted hand training has shown positive effects on promoting neuromuscular control. Since both robot-assisted therapy and task-oriented training are often used in post-stroke rehabilitation, we raised the question of whether two interventions engender differential effects in different domains. Methods The study was conducted using a randomized, two-period crossover design. Twenty-four chronic stroke survivors received a 12-session robot-assisted intervention followed by a 12-session task-oriented intervention or vice versa. A 1-month washout period between each intervention was implemented. Outcome measures were evaluated before the intervention, after the first 12-session intervention, and after the second 12-session intervention. Clinical assessments included Fugl-Meyer Assessment for Upper Extremity, Wolf Motor Function Test, Action Research Arm Test and Motor Activity Log. Results Our findings suggested that EMG-driven robot-assisted therapy was as effective as task-oriented training in terms of improving upper limbs functional performance in activity domain, and robot-assisted therapy was more effective in improving movement duration during functional tasks. Task-oriented training showed better improvement in body function domain and activity and participation domain, especially in improving spontaneous use of affected arm during daily activities. Conclusions Both intervention protocol had their own advantages in different domains, and robot-assisted therapy may save manpower and be considered as an alternative intervention to task-oriented training. Combining the two approaches could yield results greater than either alone, which awaits further study. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03624153. Registered on 9th August 2018, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03624153 .

Keywords