The Effect of Motor Relearning Program on Functional Mobility in Stroke Rehabilitation.

Trial statusRecruiting
Trial phaseNot applicable
Trial typeInterventional
Biological sexAll
Age45-65
SponsorUniversity of Jazan

About this trial

1. To find out the effectiveness of conventional physiotherapy on improving functional mobility of lower extremity among chronic hemiplegic subjects. 2. To find out the effcctiveness of motor relearning program along with conventional physical therapy treatment on improving functional mobility of lower extremity among chronic hemiplegic subjects. 3. To find out the effectiveness of motor relearning program along with conventional physical therapy treatment over conventional physical therapy on improving functional mobility of lower extremity among chronic hemiplegic subjects.

Eligibility criteria

This trial does not accept healthy volunteers

Qualifiers

Right or left-sided chronic hemiplegic subjects.

More than six months after the onset of stroke.

Age group between 45-65 years of both genders.

Scored minimally 24/30 on the Mini-Mental State Exam (MMSE).

Disqualifiers

Less than six months after the onset of stroke.

Unable to follow visual and oral commands.

The age group is below 45 years and more than 65 years.

Unilateral neglect.

Trial design

Design model

Parallel

Treatments tested in this trial

  • Motor Relearning Program

    Other intervention

    Total duration of the intervention is 45 minutes per session (30 minutes of CPT treatment followed by 15 minutes MRP), three sessions per week. MRP of sitting and standing activities: The physical therapist will instruct the participant, who will be seated in an armrest-equipped chair, to keep their feet back and position their trunk forward.. The participant will then be guided to press down through the affected foot, stand up quickly, and move their hips forward. The therapist will suggest pressing down through the participant's knee along the leg while moving it forward through the affected foot. MRP of standing to sitting: The participant will stand while the physiotherapist assists with anterior shoulder movement and knee bending at the start of the transition. The therapist will then help maintain weight on the affected leg while sitting. The participant will progress by standing and sitting at different seat heights, stopping at various points in the ROM, and changing speed.

  • Conventional Physical Therapy

    Other intervention

    Conventional Physical Therapy (CPT) will be administered to the control group three times per week for six weeks (45 minutes per session). CPT treatments such as mat activities, assisted movements, weight-bearing strategies, and gymnasium training will be given to the control group.

Treatment groups

32 Participants
are divided into 2 treatment groups
Group A: ControlActive comparator 1 intervention
Group B: ExperimentalExperimental treatment 1 intervention

Trial outcomes

Primary outcomes

1

Barthel Index (BI)

The Barthel index, frequently used for stroke, gauges the level of help needed by an individual for ten mobility and daily living tasks. The total of all weighted individual item scores is converted into a single overall score, which ranges from 0 to 100. Consequently, "0" represents total independence from all ten activities. It takes 5 to 10 minutes to complete, has strong validity and reliability, and has minimal sensitivity for high-level functioning (Bhalerao et al., 2011).

Time frame
week 0 and week 6
2

Motor Assessment Scale (MAS)

MAS is used to evaluate motor skills. MAS records eight functional activities: rolling in bed, sitting, sit to stand, walking, balancing in seated position, upper arm, hand, and wrist activities. The general tone of the body is noted in the ninth item. The scale for each item is 0 to 6. Hence, a score of 0 to 54 (normal function). According to WHO guidelines, MAS is supposed to be tested on the severity of disabilities. The MAS was highly dependable, with an average inter-rater reliability of .95 and an average test-retest reliability of 0.98 (Bhalerao et al., 2011).

Time frame
week 0 and week 6

Secondary outcomes

Other outcomes

Sponsors and contacts

Click on the lead sponsor to view all of their trials.

University of Jazan

Lead sponsor

King Saud Medical City

Collaborator