Effects of Technology-Assisted Rehabilitation After Spinal Cord Injury: Pilot Randomized Controlled Crossover Trial
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Technology-assisted and robotic rehabilitation methods are increasingly used in neurorehabilitation. Still, scarce evidence exists on their effects on upper extremity functioning after spinal cord injury, especially at the chronic stage. Objective: The present study aims to evaluate the effects of a 6-week intervention focusing on technology-assisted upper extremity rehabilitation in adults 1-8 years after incomplete cervical spinal cord injury. Methods: In this pilot randomized controlled crossover trial, 20 participants (10 men, 34-73 y of age) were recruited by mail and randomized into 2 sequences (AB: n=10 and BA: n=10). All participants received a 6-week rehabilitation intervention in Period 1 or Period 2, with a 4-week washout period in between. The intervention was delivered 3 times a week for 6 weeks (18 sessions) by occupational therapists specialized in spinal cord injuries. Each 1-hour therapy session included a minimum of 30 minutes of technology-assisted upper extremity rehabilitation using interactive and task-specific AMADEO, DIEGO, or PABLO devices. Other occupational therapy activities were allowed to complete the 1-hour therapy session. The effects of the 6-week rehabilitation intervention were compared with 6 weeks of no intervention, and the analyses were based on paired data. Each participant served as their own control. Hand and arm function were evaluated using the Action Research Arm Test, the American Spinal Injury Association-Upper Extremity Motor Score (ASIA-UEMS), grip strength, pinch strength, and the Spinal Cord Independence Measure-Self Report. Rehabilitation goal attainment was evaluated by the Goal Attainment Scale. Face-to-face assessments were conducted at baseline, after Period 1, after Period 2, and at 6 months, except for the Goal Attainment Scale, which was used at the beginning and immediately after the rehabilitation intervention. Results: The effects of the rehabilitation intervention compared to no intervention were statistically insignificant, except for the ASIA-UEMS (median change 1, IQR 0-2 point versus 0, IQR -2 to 0 point) in participants in sequence BA (n=7) who received the rehabilitation intervention during Period 2 (P=.04). The rehabilitation intervention showed good feasibility and tolerability in adults with incomplete cervical spinal cord injury. Of 20 participants (median age 62, IQR 58-66 y), 19 enrolled in the study, and 17 completed at least 80% of the rehabilitation sessions. Fourteen out of 16 participants included in the final analysis attained their rehabilitation goals. The goals were mainly focusing on "fine hand use" and "hand and arm use" related to self-care and domestic life. Conclusions: Results of this pilot study suggest that technology-assisted upper extremity rehabilitation provided by occupational therapists is safe and has potential for broader clinical use in adults with incomplete cervical spinal cord injury. The rehabilitation intervention showed good feasibility and positive outcomes in rehabilitation goal attainment. This study was left unpowered, and the results need to be confirmed in a larger randomized controlled trial.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,006 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,006 | 0,003 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,011 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».