Abstract
Objective Post-stroke spasticity prevalence increases with time from stroke onset, and negatively impacts the patient’s quality of life. Vibratory stimulation (VS) to the spastic muscles can reduce spasticity, whereas action observation (AO) and mirror therapy (MT) are reported to be less effective for spasticity reduction. However, these effects have not been compared within the same individuals. Therefore, this study compared the spasticity-reducing effects of VS, AO, and MT.
Methods Independent groups of 13 patients with chronic stroke participated in the study. In Experiment 1, the participants underwent VS, AO, and combined VS+AO on separate days. In Experiment 2, different participants received VS, MT, and VS+MT. Spasticity was assessed using the Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS) before and after the interventions.
Results In Experiment 1, VS significantly reduced MAS scores but not AO, and AO did not enhance the VS effect in combined therapy. In Experiment 2, VS significantly reduced the MAS scores, but not MT, and MT did not enhance the VS effect in combined therapy.
Conclusion Spastic muscle VS reduced spasticity in chronically paralyzed hands; however, AO and MT did not enhance the VS effect. VS alone may be a more effective treatment for spasticity in patients with chronic stroke.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Clinical Trial
UMIN000056192
Funding Statement
This study was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Nos. JP19H05723, JP23H03706, and JP23K17453 for EN, and by JSPS KAKENHI Grant No. JP23K10417 for HN, and by JSPS KAKENHI Grant No. JP23K19907 for KN.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This study was approved by the Kyoto Tachibana University Research Ethics Committee (approval number 21-47).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data availability statement
Data supporting the findings of this study are available upon request from the corresponding authors. The data are not publicly available because they contain information that can compromise the privacy of the research participants.
