Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Background Impaired upper extremity (UE) function is a major contributor to disability after stroke. Combining robotic devices with functional electrical stimulation (FES) has emerged as a promising hybrid approach to enhance post stroke UE function. Objective To assess the preliminary efficacy of robotic training with the REACH+multi-muscle FES device compared to the REACH device alone on UE function in individuals with chronic stroke. Methods This was a pilot non-blinded randomized control trial. Twenty individuals with chronic stroke were randomized to hybrid REACH + FES (n = 10) or REACH alone training (n = 10). All participants utilized the REACH device for training, which consisted of point-to-point reaching movements in response to a visually evoked task. The REACH + FES group additionally received multi-muscle FES during the REACH device training. Training consisted of 60 min sessions, 3 times/week for six weeks, totaling 18 sessions. The primary outcomes were the kinematic outcomes from the Kinereach/TrakStar virtual reality system. Secondary outcomes included Upper Extremity Fugl Meyer Assessment (UE-FMA), Action Research Arm Test (ARAT), Reaching Performance Scale for Stroke (RPSS), and Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS). Results Both groups demonstrated improvements in kinematic and clinical outcomes post-training; but the REACH + FES group showed superior improvements in unconstrained reaching, including distance (midline, contralateral and ipsilateral directions; p < 0.05) and contralateral linearity(p < 0.05). Additionally, REACH + FES also exhibited improvements in UE impairments (UE-FMA: p < 0.025, Far component of RPSS: p < 0.05, MAS: p < 0.05) and function (ARAT: p < 0.025). Conclusion There is preliminary support for the use of an end-effector, uniaxial robotic device integrated with multi-muscle FES to maximize UE functional improvement in individuals with chronic stroke in a clinically meaningful way. Clinical Trial Registration NCT05854485.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rao et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: