Journals Library

An error occurred retrieving publication content to display, please try again.

Page not found (404)

Sorry - the page you requested could not be found.

Please choose a page from the navigation or try a website search above to find the information you need.

Robot-assisted training did not improve upper limb function after stroke when compared with an enhanced upper limb therapy programme, or usual care.

{{author}}{{author}}{{($index > metadata.AuthorsAndEtalArray.length-1) ? ',' : '.'}}

Helen Rodgers 1,2,3,*,, Helen Bosomworth 1,*,, Hermano I Krebs 4, Frederike van Wijck 5, Denise Howel 6, Nina Wilson 6, Tracy Finch 7, Natasha Alvarado 8, Laura Ternent 6, Cristina Fernandez-Garcia 6, Lydia Aird 2, Sreeman Andole 9, David L Cohen 10, Jesse Dawson 11, Gary A Ford 1,12,13, Richard Francis 1, Steven Hogg 14, Niall Hughes 15, Christopher I Price 1,2, Duncan L Turner 16, Luke Vale 6, Scott Wilkes 17, Lisa Shaw 1

1 Stroke Research Group, Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
2 Stroke Northumbria, Northumbria Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, North Tyneside, UK
3 Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
4 Mechanical Engineering Department, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA
5 School of Health and Life Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, UK
6 Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
7 Nursing, Midwifery and Health, Northumbria University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
8 School of Healthcare, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
9 Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust, Romford, UK
10 London North West University Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
11 Institute of Cardiovascular and Medical Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK
12 Medical Sciences Division, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
13 Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK
14 Lay investigator (contact Stroke Research Group, Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
15 NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, Glasgow, UK
16 School of Health, Sport and Bioscience, University of East London, London, UK
17 School of Medicine, University of Sunderland, Sunderland, UK
* Corresponding author Emails: helen.rodgers@newcastle.ac.uk and helen.bosomworth@newcastle.ac.uk

Joint first authorship

Joint first authorship

Declared competing interests of authors: Helen Rodgers reports personal fees from Bayer AG (Leverkusen, Germany) outside the submitted work and was a member of the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Clinical Evaluations and Trials (CET) panel (2010–14). Gary A Ford reports personal fees from Amgen Inc. (Thousand Oaks, CA, USA), Bayer AG, Stryker Corporation (Kalamazoo, MI, USA) and Pfizer Inc. (New York, NY, USA), and grants and personal fees from Medtronic plc (Dublin, Ireland), outside the submitted work. Hermano I Krebs reports other financial activity from Interactive Motion Technologies Inc. (Boston, MA, USA) and 4Motion Robotics (Waterton, MA, USA) outside the submitted work. In addition, he has a patent issued (Interactive Robotic Therapist; US Patent 5,466,213; 1995; Massachusetts Institute of Technology) and a patent (Wrist And Upper Extremity Motion; US Patent No. 7,618,381; 2009; Massachusetts Institute of Technology) licensed to Bionik Laboratories Corp. (Toronto, ON, Canada). Denise Howel reports membership of the NIHR Programme Grants for Applied Research Programme subcommittee (2016 to present), and was a member of the NIHR Health Services and Delivery Research Programme Commissioning Board (2012–15). Jesse Dawson reports other financial activity from MicroTransponder Inc. (Austin, TX, USA) outside the submitted work. Luke Vale was a member of the NIHR HTA CET panel (2015–18).

Funding: {{metadata.Funding}}

{{metadata.Journal}} Volume: {{metadata.Volume}}, Issue: {{metadata.Issue}}, Published in {{metadata.PublicationDate | date:'MMMM yyyy'}}

https://doi.org/{{metadata.DOI}}

Citation:{{author}}{{ (($index < metadata.AuthorsArray.length-1) && ($index <=6)) ? ', ' : '' }}{{(metadata.AuthorsArray.length <= 6) ? '.' : '' }} {{(metadata.AuthorsArray.length > 6) ? 'et al. ' : ''}}. {{metadata.JournalShortName}} {{metadata.PublicationDate | date:'yyyy'}};{{metadata.Volume}}({{metadata.Issue}})

Crossmark status check

Report Content

The full text of this issue is available as a PDF document from the Toolkit section on this page.

The full text of this issue is available as a PDF document from the Toolkit section on this page.

If you would like to receive a notification when this project publishes in the NIHR Journals Library, please submit your email address below.

Responses to this report

No responses have been published.

 

If you would like to submit a response to this publication, please do so using the form below:

Comments submitted to the NIHR Journals Library are electronic letters to the editor. They enable our readers to debate issues raised in research reports published in the Journals Library. We aim to post within 14 working days all responses that contribute substantially to the topic investigated, as determined by the Editors.  Non-relevant comments will be deleted.

Your name and affiliations will be published with your comment.

Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. The Editors may add, remove, or edit comments at their absolute discretion.

By submitting your response, you are stating that you agree to the terms & conditions

An error has occurred in processing the XML document