Emerging literature suggests that wearable devices offer a promising option for self-directed home-based upper limb training for persons with stroke. However, little research is available to explore integrating smartphone applications with wearable devices to provide upper limb telerehabilitation to stroke survivors at home. This study examined the feasibility and potential therapeutic effects of a wearable device integrated with a smartphone-based telerehabilitation system to provide upper limb rehabilitation to stroke survivors at home.
Methods
Twelve stroke survivors from community support groups participated in a treatment consisting of 4-week telerehabilitation using a wearable device and 4-week conventional therapy successively in a single-blind, randomised crossover study. A 3-week washout period was administered between the two 4-week treatments. The primary outcome measures were the Fugl Meyer Assessment, the Action Research Arm Test, and the active range of motion (ROM) of the upper limb. Secondary outcome measures included the Motor Activity Log and exercise adherence.
Results
Results showed that the active ROM of participants’ hemiplegic shoulder improved more significantly after 4 weeks of telerehabilitation with the wearable device than with conventional therapy. No significant differences were found in other outcome measures.
Conclusions
A 4-week telerehabilitation programme using a wearable device improves the hemiplegic upper limb in community-dwelling stroke survivors and may be feasible as an effective intervention for self-directed upper limb rehabilitation at home.
PollockASt GeorgeBFentonM, et al.Top ten research priorities relating to life after stroke. Lancet Neurol2012; 11(3): 209.
2.
PollockAFarmerSEBradyMC, et al.Interventions for improving upper limb function after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2014; 11: 1–138.
3.
Van PeppenRPKwakkelGWood-DauphineeS, et al.The impact of physical therapy on functional outcomes after stroke: What's the evidence?Clin Rehabil2004; 18(8): 833–862.
4.
Da-SilvaRHMooreSARodgersH, et al.Wristband accelerometers to motiVate arm exercises after stroke (WAVES): A pilot randomized controlled trial. Clin Rehabil2019; 33(8): 1391–1403.
5.
FryerCELukerJAMcDonnellMN, et al.Self management programmes for quality of life in people with stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2016; 2016(8): 1–72.
6.
HarrisJEEngJJMillerWC, et al.A self-administered Graded Repetitive Arm Supplementary Program (GRASP) improves arm function during inpatient stroke rehabilitation: A multi-site randomized controlled trial. Stroke2009; 40(6): 2123–2128.
7.
DobkinBH. A rehabilitation-internet-of-things in the home to augment motor skills and exercise training. Neurorehabil Neural Repair2017; 31(3): 217–227.
8.
AsanoMTaiBCYeoFY, et al.Home-based tele-rehabilitation presents comparable positive impact on self-reported functional outcomes as usual care: The Singapore Tele-technology aided rehabilitation in stroke (stars) randomised controlled trial. J Telemed Telecare2021; 27(4): 231–238.
9.
Maceira-ElviraPPopaTSchmidAC, et al.Wearable technology in stroke rehabilitation: Towards improved diagnosis and treatment of upper-limb motor impairment. J Neuroeng Rehabil2019; 16(1): 1–18.
10.
ParkerJPowellLMawsonS. Effectiveness of upper limb wearable technology for improving activity and participation in adult stroke survivors: Systematic review. J Med Internet Res2020; 22(1): e15981.
11.
RodgersMMAlonGPaiVM, et al.Wearable technologies for active living and rehabilitation: Current research challenges and future opportunities. J Rehabil Assist Technol Eng2019; 6: 1–8.
12.
WangQMarkopoulosPYuB, et al.Interactive wearable systems for upper body rehabilitation: A systematic review. J Neuroeng Rehabil2017; 14(1): 1–21.
13.
KimGJParnandiAEvaS, et al.The use of wearable sensors to assess and treat the upper extremity after stroke: A scoping review. Disabil Rehabil2022; 44(20): 6119–6138.
14.
JakusGStojmenovaKTomažičS, et al.A system for efficient motor learning using multimodal augmented feedback. Multimed Tools Appl2017; 76: 20409–20421.
15.
MoinuddinAGoelASethiY. The role of augmented feedback on motor learning: A systematic review. Cureus2021; 13(11): e19695.
16.
Van VlietPMWulfG. Extrinsic feedback for motor learning after stroke: What is the evidence?Disabil Rehabil2006; 28: 831–840.
17.
WeiWXFongKNChungRC, et al.“Remind-to-move” for promoting upper extremity recovery using wearable devices in subacute stroke: A multi-center randomized controlled study. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng2018; 27: 51–59.
18.
WhitfordMSchearerERowlettM. Effects of in home high dose accelerometer-based feedback on perceived and actual use in participants chronic post-stroke. Physiother Theory Pract2018; 36(7): 799–809.
19.
ChaeSHKimYLeeKS, et al.Development and clinical evaluation of a web-based upper limb home rehabilitation system using a smartwatch and machine learning model for chronic stroke survivors: Prospective comparative study. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth2020; 8: e17216.
20.
ChoudhurySSinghRShobhanaA, et al.A novel wearable device for motor recovery of hand function in chronic stroke survivors. Neurorehabil Neural Repair2020; 34: 600–608.
21.
PalmcrantzSPennatiGVBerglingH, et al.Feasibility and potential effects of using the electro-dress Mollii on spasticity and functioning in chronic stroke. J Neuroeng Rehabil2020; 17: 109. 2020/08/12.
22.
SeimCEWolfSLStarnerTE. Wearable vibrotactile stimulation for upper extremity rehabilitation in chronic stroke: Clinical feasibility trial using the VTS glove. J Neuroeng Rehabil2021; 18: 14.
23.
LeeHSParkYJParkSW. The effects of virtual reality training on function in chronic stroke patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BioMed Res Int2019; 2019: 7595639.
24.
WeissPLKizonyRFeintuchU, et al. Virtual reality in neurorehabilitation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006, pp. 182–197.
25.
BallesterBRNirmeJCamachoI, et al.Domiciliary VR-based therapy for functional recovery and cortical reorganization: Randomized controlled trial in participants at the chronic stage post stroke. JMIR Serious Games2017; 5: e6773.
26.
WittmannFHeldJPLambercyO, et al.Self-directed arm therapy at home after stroke with a sensor-based virtual reality training system. J Neuroeng Rehabil2016; 13: 1–10.
27.
TohSFMFongKNKGonzalezPC, et al. Application of home-based wearable technologies in physical rehabilitation for stroke: A scoping review. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng2023; 31: 1614–1623.
28.
LauraS. Smartphone ownership is growing rapidly around the world, but not always equally. Pew Research Center,2019 retrieved on 20 Dec 2023 from https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2019/02/05/smartphone-ownership-is-growing-rapidly-around-the-world-but-not-always-equally/
29.
Moral-MunozJAZhangWCoboMJ, et al.Smartphone-based systems for physical rehabilitation applications: A systematic review. Assist Technol2021; 33: 223–236.
30.
TohSFMGonzalezPCFongKN. Usability of a wearable device for home-based upper limb telerehabilitation in persons with stroke: A mixed-methods study. Digital Health2023; 9: 20552076231153737.
31.
FongKNgBChanD, et al.Development of the Hong Kong version of the functional test for the hemiplegic upper extremity (FTHUE-HK). Hong Kong J Occupational Therapy2004; 14: 21–29.
32.
SchulzKFAltmanDGMoherD. CONSORT 2010 Statement: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. Br Med J2010; 340: c332. 2010/03/25.
33.
Sczesny-KaiserMTrostRAachM, et al.A randomized and controlled crossover study investigating the improvement of walking and posture functions in chronic stroke patients using HAL exoskeleton–the HALESTRO study (HAL-exoskeleton STROke study). Front Neurosci2019; 13: 259.
34.
HijmansJMHaleLASatherleyJA, et al.Bilateral upper-limb rehabilitation after stroke using a movement-based game controller. J Rehabil Res Dev2011; 48: 1005–1013. 2011/11/10.
35.
Fugl-MeyerARJääsköLLeymanI, et al.A method for evaluation of physical performance. Scand J Rehabil Med1975; 7: 13–31.
36.
LyleRC. A performance test for assessment of upper limb function in physical rehabilitation treatment and research. Int J Rehabil Res1981; 4: 483–492.
37.
TaubEMcCullochKUswatteG, et al.Motor activity log (mal) manual. UAB Train. CI Ther.2011; 1: 18.
38.
NeiblingBAJacksonSMHaywardKS, et al.Perseverance with technology-facilitated home-based upper limb practice after stroke: A systematic mixed studies review. J Neuroeng Rehabil2021; 18: 43. 2021/02/26.
39.
FongKNLoPCYoyoSY, et al.Effects of sensory cueing on voluntary arm use for patients with chronic stroke: A preliminary study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil2011; 92: 15–23.
40.
WellekSBlettnerM. On the proper use of the crossover design in clinical trials: Part 18 of a series on evaluation of scientific publications. Dtsch Arztebl Int2012; 109: 276.
41.
DongAQVFongNKK. Remind to move–A novel treatment on hemiplegic arm functions in children with unilateral cerebral palsy: A randomized cross-over study. Dev Neurorehabil2016; 19: 275–283.
42.
BelmonteRTejeroMFerrerM, et al.Efficacy of low-frequency low-intensity electrotherapy in the treatment of breast cancer-related lymphoedema: A cross-over randomized trial. Clin Rehabil2012; 26: 607–618. 2011/12/17.
43.
LindnerRCohenJ. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (rev ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1988. Percept Mot Skills1988; 67: 1007–1007.
44.
SigristRRauterGRienerR, et al.Augmented visual, auditory, haptic, and multimodal feedback in motor learning: A review. Psychon Bull Rev2013; 20: 21–53.
45.
CirsteaMLevinMF. Improvement of arm movement patterns and endpoint control depends on type of feedback during practice in stroke survivors. Neurorehabil Neural Repair2007; 21: 398–411.
46.
MolierBIVan AsseldonkEHHermensHJ, et al.Nature, timing, frequency and type of augmented feedback; does it influence motor relearning of the hemiparetic arm after stroke? A systematic review. Disabil Rehabil2010; 32: 1799–1809.
47.
MaierMBallesterBRVerschurePF. Principles of neurorehabilitation after stroke based on motor learning and brain plasticity mechanisms. Front Syst Neurosci2019; 13: 74.
48.
CramerSCDodakianLLeV, et al.Efficacy of home-based telerehabilitation vs in-clinic therapy for adults after stroke: A randomized clinical trial. JAMA Neurol2019; 76: 1079–1087.
49.
McLeanSMBurtonMBradleyL, et al.Interventions for enhancing adherence with physiotherapy: A systematic review. Man Ther2010; 15: 514–521.
50.
FriedrichMGittlerGHalberstadtY, et al.Combined exercise and motivation program: Effect on the compliance and level of disability of patients with chronic low back pain: A randomized controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil1998; 79: 475–487.
51.
MurphyTHCorbettD. Plasticity during stroke recovery: From synapse to behaviour. Nat Rev Neurosci2009; 10: 861–872.
52.
CarpinellaICattaneoDFerrarinM. Quantitative assessment of upper limb motor function in multiple sclerosis using an instrumented action research arm test. J Neuroeng Rehabil2014; 11: 1–16.
53.
LeeHHKimDYSohnMK, et al.Revisiting the proportional recovery model in view of the ceiling effect of fugl-meyer assessment. Stroke2021; 52: 3167–3175.
54.
LohseKRLangCEBoydLA. Is more better? Using metadata to explore dose–response relationships in stroke rehabilitation. Stroke2014; 45: 2053–2058.
55.
NattaDDNLejeuneTDetrembleurC, et al.Effectiveness of a self-rehabilitation program to improve upper-extremity function after stroke in developing countries: A randomized controlled trial. Ann Phys Rehabil Med2021; 64: 101413.
56.
WardNSBranderFKellyK. Intensive upper limb neurorehabilitation in chronic stroke: Outcomes from the queen square programme. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry2019; 90: 498–506.
57.
WinsteinCJWolfSLDromerickAW, et al.Effect of a task-oriented rehabilitation program on upper extremity recovery following motor stroke: The ICARE randomized clinical trial. JAMA2016; 315: 571–581.
58.
Klamroth-MarganskaVBlancoJCampenK, et al.Three-dimensional, task-specific robot therapy of the arm after stroke: A multicentre, parallel-group randomised trial. The Lancet Neurology2014; 13: 159–166.
59.
LimCYInJ. Considerations for crossover design in clinical study. Korean J Anesthesiol2021; 74: 293–299.
60.
JonesBKenwardMG. Design and analysis of cross-over trials. New York: CRC press, 2014.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
