ABSTRACT
Background Reactive balance training (RBT) may improve multiple components of physical fitness, including aerobic capacity and muscle strength. However, there have been no studies examining its effects on these factors in people with stroke.
Objectives The objectives of this pilot study were to determine the feasibility of a non-inferiority randomized controlled trial, comparing aerobic and strength training (AST) and RBT, considering sample size (primary objective), rates of accrual and withdrawal, intervention adherence, missing data, preliminary effects, and harms (secondary objectives).
Methods People who were at least six months’ post-stroke and could stand independently for >30 seconds were recruited. Peak oxygen consumption 
was measured by cardiopulmonary exercise test. Peak isokinetic torques for knee extension and flexion were measured by dynamometer.
Results Twenty-three participants (6 women) were randomized into AST and RBT groups. Four-hundred participants per group were estimated to be required for the main trial considering 
and peak isokinetic torque as primary outcomes. Rates of accrual and withdrawal were 2 participants for every quarter and 30%, respectively. On average, AST participants attended 29.6/36 sessions (range: 18-36) and RBT participants attended 23.5/36 sessions (range: 1-35). Data were missing for 
(n=2) and ABC scale (n=1) as participants declined testing. 
and peak knee extension torque of more-affected legs improved post-intervention in both groups. Ten adverse events related to study interventions resolved without medical attention.
Conclusion Progressing to a definitive single-site trial is not feasible given the large required sample size, low accrual, and high withdrawal rates.
Trial registration NCT04042961
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Clinical Trial
NCT04042961
Clinical Protocols
https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/10/6/e035740
Funding Statement
This study was funded by the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada (G-18-0021807).
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:
The study was approved by the research ethics boards of the University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario (protocol number: 18-5784) and the University of Toronto (protocol number: 37859).
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
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, the Sergey Brin Family Foundation, California Institute of Technology, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Imperial College London, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, University of Washington, and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Subject Area
Reviews and Context
0
Comment
0
TRIP Peer Reviews
0
Community Reviews
0
Automated Services
0
Blogs/Media
Author Videos