Reward During Arm Training Improves Impairment and Activity After Stroke: A Randomized Controlled Trial. (February 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Widmer, Mario; Held, Jeremia P. O.; Wittmann, Frieder; Valladares, Belen; Lambercy, Olivier; Sturzenegger, Christian; Palla, Antonella; Lutz, Kai; Luft, Andreas R.
• Is Part Of: Neurorehabilitation & neural repair. Volume 36:Number 2(2022)
• Page Start: 140
• Page End: 150
• Publication Date: 2022-02
• Subjects: rehabilitation -- stroke -- upper extremity -- virtual reality -- feedback -- reward; Nervous system -- Diseases -- Patients -- Rehabilitation -- Periodicals; Brain damage -- Patients -- Rehabilitation -- Periodicals; Spinal cord -- Wounds and injuries -- Patients -- Rehabilitation -- Periodicals; Nervous system -- Regeneration -- Periodicals; Neuroplasticity -- Periodicals; 616.804305
• DOI: 10.1177/15459683211062898
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1545-9683

Abstract

Background: Learning and learning-related neuroplasticity in motor cortex are potential mechanisms mediating recovery of movement abilities after stroke. These mechanisms depend on dopaminergic projections from midbrain that may encode reward information. Likewise, therapist experience confirms the role of feedback/reward for training efficacy after stroke. Objective: To test the hypothesis that rehabilitative training can be enhanced by adding performance feedback and monetary rewards. Methods: This multicentric, assessor-blinded, randomized controlled trial used the ArmeoSenso virtual reality rehabilitation system to train 37 first-ever subacute stroke patients in arm-reaching to moving targets. The rewarded group (n = 19) trained with performance feedback (gameplay) and contingent monetary reward. The control group (n = 18) used the same system without monetary reward and with graphically minimized performance feedback. Primary outcome was the change in the two-dimensional reaching space until the end of the intervention period. Secondary clinical assessments were performed at baseline, after 3 weeks of training (15 1-hour sessions), and at 3 month follow-up. Duration and intensity of the interventions as well as concomitant therapy were comparable between groups. Results: The two-dimensional reaching space showed an overall improvement but no difference between groups. The rewarded group, however, showed significantly greater improvements from baseline in secondary outcomes assessing arm activity (Box and Block Test at post-training: 6.03±2.95, P = .046 and 3 months: 9.66±3.11, P = .003; Wolf Motor Function Test [Score] at 3 months: .63±.22, P = .007) and arm impairment (Fugl-Meyer Upper Extremity at 3 months: 8.22±3.11, P = .011). Conclusions: Although neutral in its primary outcome, the trial signals a potential facilitating effect of reward on training-mediated improvement of arm paresis. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (ID: NCT02257125).