Feasibility of a Self-directed Upper Extremity Training Program to Promote Actual Arm Use for Individuals Living in the Community With Chronic Stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To determine the feasibility of a self-directed training protocol to promote actual arm use in everyday life. The secondary aim was to explore the initial efficacy on upper extremity (UE) outcome measures. Design Feasibility study using multiple methods. Setting Home and outpatient research lab. Participants Fifteen adults (6 women, 9 men, mean age=53.08 years) with chronic stroke living in the community. There was wide range of UE functional levels, ranging from dependent stabilizer (limited function) to functional assist (high function). Intervention Use My Arm-Remote protocol. Phase 1 consisted of clinician training on motivational interviewing (MI). Phase 2 consisted of MI sessions with participants to determine participant generated goals, training activities, and training schedules. Phase 3 consisted of UE task-oriented training (60 minutes/day, 5 days/week, for 4 weeks). Participants received daily surveys through an app to monitor arm training behavior and weekly virtual check-ins with clinicians to problem-solve challenges and adjust treatment plans. Outcome Measures Primary outcome measures were feasibility domains after intervention, measured by quantitative study data and qualitative semi-structured interviews. Secondary outcomes included the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM), Motor Activity Log (MAL), Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA), and accelerometry-based duration of use metric measured at baseline, discharge, and 4-week follow-up. Results The UMA-R was feasible in the following domains: recruitment rate, retention rate, intervention acceptance, intervention delivery, adherence frequency, and safety. Adherence to duration of daily practice did not meet our criteria. Improvements in UE outcomes were achieved at discharge and maintained at follow-up as measured by COPM-Performance subscale (F[1.42, 19.83]=17.72, P <.001) and COPM-Satisfaction subscale (F[2, 28]=14.73, P <.001), MAL (F[1.31, 18.30]=12.05, P <.01) and the FMA (F[2, 28]=16.62, P <.001). Conclusion The UMA-R was feasible and safe to implement for individuals living in the community with chronic stroke. Adherence duration was identified as area of refinement. Participants demonstrated improvements in standardized UE outcomes to support initial efficacy of the UMA-R. Shared decision-making and behavior change frameworks can support the implementation of UE self-directed rehabilitation. Our results warrant the refinement and further testing of the UMA-R.
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 | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".