↓ Skip to main content

Repetitive reaching training combined with transcranial Random Noise Stimulation in stroke survivors with chronic and severe arm paresis is feasible: a pilot, triple-blind, randomised case series

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
144 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Repetitive reaching training combined with transcranial Random Noise Stimulation in stroke survivors with chronic and severe arm paresis is feasible: a pilot, triple-blind, randomised case series
Published in
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, May 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12984-017-0253-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hayward, Kathryn S., Brauer, Sandra G., Ruddy, Kathy L., Lloyd, David, Carson, Richard G., Kathryn S. Hayward, Sandra G. Brauer, Kathy L. Ruddy, David Lloyd, Richard G. Carson

Abstract

Therapy that combines repetitive training with non-invasive brain stimulation is a potential avenue to enhance upper limb recovery after stroke. This study aimed to investigate the feasibility of transcranial Random Noise Stimulation (tRNS), timed to coincide with the generation of voluntary motor commands, during reaching training. A triple-blind pilot RCT was completed. Four stroke survivors with chronic (6-months to 5-years) and severe arm paresis, not taking any medications that had the potential to alter cortical excitability, and no contraindications to tRNS or MRI were recruited. Participants were randomly allocated to 12 sessions of reaching training over 4-weeks with active or sham tRNS delivered over the lesioned hemisphere motor representation. tRNS was triggered to coincide with a voluntary movement attempt, ceasing after 5-s. At this point, peripheral nerve stimulation enabled full range reaching. To determine feasibility, we considered adverse events, training outcomes, clinical outcomes, corticospinal tract (CST) structural integrity, and reflections on training through in-depth interviews from each individual case. Two participants received active and two sham tRNS. There were no adverse events. All training sessions were completed, repetitive practice performed and clinically relevant improvements across motor outcomes demonstrated. The amount of improvement varied across individuals and appeared to be independent of group allocation and CST integrity. Reaching training that includes tRNS timed to coincide with generation of voluntary motor commands is feasible. Clinical improvements were possible even in the most severely affected individuals as evidenced by CST integrity. This study was registered on the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) http://www.ANZCTR.org.au/ACTRN12614000952640.aspx . Registration date 4 September 2014, first participant date 9 September 2014.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 144 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 144 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 30 21%
Student > Master 25 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 12%
Researcher 13 9%
Student > Postgraduate 7 5%
Other 11 8%
Unknown 41 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 33 23%
Neuroscience 22 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 8%
Engineering 9 6%
Psychology 7 5%
Other 15 10%
Unknown 47 33%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 January 2018.
All research outputs
#7,430,244
of 12,376,381 outputs
Outputs from Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
#394
of 669 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#142,046
of 273,706 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
#12
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,376,381 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 669 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 273,706 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.