Optimization of Upper Extremity Rehabilitation by Combining Telerehabilitation With an Exergame in People With Chronic Stroke: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Exergames have the potential to provide an accessible, remote approach for poststroke upper extremity (UE) rehabilitation. However, the use of exergames without any follow-up by a health professional could lead to compensatory movements during the exercises, inadequate choice of difficulty level, exercises not being completed, and lack of motivation to pursue exercise programs, thereby decreasing their benefits. Combining telerehabilitation with exergames could allow continuous adjustment of the exercises and monitoring of the participant's completion and adherence. At present, there is limited evidence regarding the feasibility or efficacy of combining telerehabilitation and exergames for stroke rehabilitation. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to (1) determine the preliminary efficacy of using telerehabilitation combined with exergames on UE motor recovery, function, quality of life, and motivation in participants with chronic stroke, compared with conventional therapy (the graded repetitive arm supplementary program; GRASP); (2) examine the feasibility of using the technology with participants diagnosed with stroke at home; and (3) identify the obstacles and facilitators for its use by participants diagnosed with stroke and stroke therapists and understand the shared decision-making process. METHODS: A mixed methods study protocol is proposed, including a randomized, blinded feasibility trial with an embedded multiple case study. The intervention consists of the provision of a remote rehabilitation program, during which participants will use the Jintronix exergame for UE training and the Reacts Application to conduct videoconferenced sessions with the therapists (physical or occupational therapists). We plan to recruit 52 participants diagnosed with stroke, randomly assigned to a control group (n=26; 2-month on-paper home exercise program: the GRASP with no supervision) and an experimental group (n=26; 2-month home program using the technology). The primary outcome is the Fugl-Meyer UE Assessment, a performance-based measure of UE impairment. The secondary outcomes are self-reported questionnaires and include the Motor Activity Log-28 (quality and frequency of use of the UE), Stroke Impact Scale-16 (the quality of life), and Treatment Self-Regulation Questionnaire (motivation). Feasibility data include process, resources, management, and scientific outcomes. Qualitative data will be collected by interviews with both participants and therapists. RESULTS: At present, data collection was ongoing with one participant who had completed the exergame- telerehabilitation based intervention. We expect to collect preliminary efficacy data of this technology on the functional and motor recovery of the UE, following a stroke; collect feasibility data with users at home (adherence, safety, and technical difficulties); and identify the obstacles and facilitators for the technology use and understand the shared decision-making process. CONCLUSIONS: This paper describes the protocol underlying the study of a telerehabilitation-exergame technology to contribute to understanding its feasibility and preliminary efficacy for UE stroke rehabilitation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03759106; http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT03759106. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/14629.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".