Comparisons of three different modes of digital mirror therapy for post-stroke rehabilitation: Preliminary results of randomized controlled trial

Abstract

Objective Technologically adapted mirror therapy shows promising results in improving motor function for stroke survivors. The treatment effects of a newly developed multi-mode stroke rehabilitation system offering multiple training modes in digital mirror therapy remain unknown. This study aimed to examine the effects of unilateral mirror visual feedback (MVF) with unimanual training (UM-UT), unilateral MVF with bimanual training (UM-BT), and bilateral MVF with bimanual training (BM-BT) on clinical outcomes in stroke survivors, compared to classical mirror therapy (CMT). Methods Thirty-five participants were randomly assigned to one of four groups receiving fifteen 60-minute training sessions for 3–4 weeks. The Fugl-Meyer Assessment for Upper Extremity (FMA-UE), Chedoke Arm and Hand Activity Inventory (CAHAI), Revised Nottingham Sensory Assessment (rNSA), Motor Activity Log (MAL), and EQ-5D-5L were administered at pre- and post-intervention and at 1-month follow-up. Results After intervention and follow-up, significant within-group treatment efficacies were found on most primary outcomes of the FMA-UE and CAHAI scores in all four groups. Significant within-group improvements in the secondary outcomes were found on the MAL and EQ-5D-5L index in the UM-BT group, and the rNSA tactile sensation and MAL quality of movement subscales in the BM-BT group. No significant between-group treatment efficacies were found. Conclusions UM-UT, UM-BT, BM-BT, and CMT led to similar clinical effects on the FMA-UE and can be considered effective alternative interventions for post-stroke upper-limb motor rehabilitation. UM-BT and BM-BT showed within-group improvements in functional performance in the patients’ affected upper limbs in real-life activities.