Feasibility, safety, and efficacy of task-oriented mirrored robotic training on upper-limb functions and activities of daily living in subacute poststroke patients: a pilot study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Robotic training with high repetitions facilitates upper-limb movements but provides fewer benefits for activities of daily living. Integrating activities of daily living training tasks and mirror therapy into a robot may enhance the functional gains of robotic training. AIM: The aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of the task-oriented mirrored upper-limb robotic training on the upper-limb functions and activities of daily living of subacute poststroke patients. DESIGN: This study is a single-blinded, active-controlled pilot study. SETTING: The study was carried out at rehabilitation outpatient clinic and ward. POPULATION: A total of 32 subacute poststroke patients were enrolled in the study. METHODS: The enrolled patients were allocated into two groups in a ratio of 1:1. The experimental group received 4 weeks of task-oriented mirrored upper-limb robotic training, consisting of five sessions of 30-minute duration, along with 30 minutes of conventional training. The control group only received 60 minutes of conventional training. The outcome measures were the Fugl-Meyer Assessment Scale for Upper Extremity, Modified Barthel Index, Stroke Self-Efficacy Scale, System Usability Scale, and Quebec User Evaluation with Assistive Technology. RESULTS: All patients completed the full training sessions without significant adverse events related to robotic training. The task-oriented mirrored upper-limb robotic training led to increased Fugl-Meyer Assessment Scale for Upper Extremity (difference: 10.38 points, P<0.001) and Modified Barthel Index (difference: 18.38 points, P<0.001) scores, both of which exceeded the minimal clinically important difference. Intergroup analysis showed significantly higher improvements in the Fugl-Meyer Assessment Scale for Upper Extremity total scores, shoulder, wrist, and hand scores; and Modified Barthel Index scores in the experimental group than in conventional training (all P<0.05). Both groups showed significant improvements in Stroke Self-Efficacy Scale scores after the intervention (both P<0.001), but without a statistically significant intergroup difference (P>0.05). Participants in the experimental group scored an average usability perception score of 74.74 (good) and an average satisfaction score of four or more out of five. CONCLUSIONS: In general, task-oriented mirrored upper-limb robotic training appears feasible and safe for subacute poststroke rehabilitation, facilitating the recovery of upper-limb functions and activities of daily living. CLINICAL REHABILITATION IMPACT: Task-oriented mirrored upper-limb robotic training shows promise for future clinical rehabilitation and clinical trials involving subacute poststroke patients.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".