Early and intensive Motor Training for people with spinal cord injuries (the SCI-MT Trial): description of the intervention

A home-based self-directed EEG neurofeedback intervention for people with chronic neuropathic pain following spinal cord injury (the StoPain Trial): description of the intervention

STUDY DESIGN

Randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES

The objective is to describe an electroencephalography (EEG) neurofeedback intervention that will be provided in a randomised controlled trial for people with neuropathic pain following spinal cord injury (SCI): the StoPain Trial. In this trial, participants in the treatment group will implement an EEG neurofeedback system as an analgesic intervention at home, while participants in the control group will continue with the treatments available to them in the community.

SETTING

University-based study in Sydney, Australia.

METHODS/RESULTS

This manuscript describes the rationale and components of the EEG neurofeedback intervention designed for individuals with SCI neuropathic pain and intended for home-based implementation. Our report is based on the criteria of the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist, and includes why the efficacy of EEG neurofeedback will be investigated, what will be provided, who will administer it, and how, where, when, and how much the EEG neurofeedback intervention will be administered.

CONCLUSIONS

This manuscript provides a detailed description of a complex intervention used in a randomised controlled trial. This description will facilitate the subsequent interpretation of the trial results and allow for the replication of the intervention in clinical practice and future trials.

SPONSORSHIP

Australian Government Medical Research Future Fund (2020 Rare Cancers Rare Diseases and Unmet Needs Scheme: 2006020).

Quantifying Treatments as Usual and with Technologies in Neurorehabilitation of Individuals with Spinal Cord Injury

Several technologies have been introduced into neurorehabilitation programs to enhance traditional treatment of individuals with Spinal Cord Injury (SCI). Their effectiveness has been widely investigated, but their adoption has not been properly quantified. The aim of this study is to assess the distribution of conventional (Treatment As Usual-TAU) and technology-aided (Treatment With Technologies-TWT) treatments conveniently grouped based on different therapeutic goals in a selected SCI unit. Data from 104 individuals collected in 29 months were collected in a custom database and categorized according to both the conventional American Impairment Scale classification and a newly developed Multifactor (MF) clustering approach that considers additional sources of information (the lesion level, the level of independence in the activities of daily living, and the hospitalization duration). Results indicated an average technology adoption of about 30%. Moreover, the MF clusters were less overlapped, and the differences in TWT adoption were more pronounced than in AIS-based clustering. MF clustering was capable of grouping individuals based both on neurological features and functional abilities. In particular, individuals with motor complete injuries were grouped together, whereas individuals with sensorimotor incomplete SCI were collected separately based on the lesion level. As regards TWT adoption, we found that in the case of motor complete SCI, TWT for muscle tone control and modulation was mainly selected (about 90% of TWT), while the other types of TWT were seldom adopted. Even for individuals with incomplete SCI, the most frequent rehabilitation goal was muscle tone modulation (about 75% of TWT), regardless of the AIS level, and technologies to improve walking ability (about 12% of TWT) and balance control (about 10% of TWT) were mainly used for individuals with thoracic or lumbar lesions. Analyzing TAU distribution, we found that the highest adoption of muscle tone modulation strategies was reported in the case of individuals with motor complete SCI (about 42% of TAU), that is, in cases when almost no gait training was pursued (about 1% of TAU). In the case of cervical motor incomplete SCI, compared to thoracic and lumbar incomplete SCI, there was a greater focus on muscle tone control and force recruitment in addition to walking training (38% and 14% of TAU, respectively) than on balance training. Overall, the MF clustering provided more insights than the traditional AIS-based classification, highlighting differences in TWT adoption. These findings suggest that a wider overview that considers both neurological and functional characteristics of individuals after SCI based on a multifactor analysis could enhance the personalization of neurorehabilitation strategies.

Using the benefit-harm trade-off method to determine the smallest worthwhile effect of intensive motor training on strength for people with spinal cord injury

STUDY DESIGN

Interviews using the benefit-harm trade-off method and an online survey.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the smallest worthwhile effect (SWE) of motor training on strength for people with spinal cord injury (SCI).

SETTING

SCI units, Australia.

METHODS

Forty people with recent SCI who had participated in motor training as part of their rehabilitation program (patient participants) and 37 physiotherapists (physiotherapist participants) working in SCI were recruited. The patient participants underwent an iterative process using the benefit-harm trade-off method to determine the SWE of motor training on strength. The physiotherapist participants were given an online survey to determine the SWE for five different scenarios. Both groups considered the SWE of a physiotherapy intervention involving an additional 12 h of motor training for 10 weeks on top of usual care. They were required to estimate the smallest improvement in strength (points on the Total Motor Score of the International Standards for Neurological Classification of SCI) to justify the effort and associated costs, risks or inconveniences of the motor training.

RESULTS

The median (interquartile range) smallest improvement in strength that patient and physiotherapist participants deemed worth the effort and associated costs, risks or inconveniences of the motor training was 3 (1-5) points, and 9 (7-13) points, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

People with recent SCI are willing to devote 12 h a week for 10 weeks to motor training in addition to their usual care to gain small changes in strength. Physiotherapists wanted to see greater improvements to justify the intervention.

Early and Intensive Motor Training for people with spinal cord injuries (the SCI-MT Trial): protocol of the process evaluation

INTRODUCTION

People with spinal cord injury receive physical rehabilitation to promote neurological recovery. Physical rehabilitation commences as soon as possible when a person is medically stable. One key component of physical rehabilitation is motor training. There is initial evidence to suggest that motor training can enhance neurological recovery if it is provided soon after injury and in a high dosage. The Early and Intensive Motor Training Trial is a pragmatic randomised controlled trial to determine whether 10 weeks of intensive motor training enhances neurological recovery for people with spinal cord injury. This pragmatic randomised controlled trial will recruit 220 participants from 15 spinal injury units in Australia, Scotland, Italy, Norway, England, Belgium and the Netherlands. This protocol paper describes the process evaluation that will run alongside the Early and Intensive Motor Training Trial. This process evaluation will help to explain the trial results and explore the potential facilitators and barriers to the possible future rollout of the trial intervention.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The UK Medical Research Council process evaluation framework and the Implementation Research Logic Model will be used to explain the trial outcomes and inform future implementation. Key components of the context, implementation and mechanism of impact, as well as the essential elements of the intervention and outcomes, will be identified and analysed. Qualitative and quantitative data will be collected and triangulated with the results of the Early and Intensive Motor Training Trial to strengthen the findings of this process evaluation.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval for the Early and Intensive Motor Training Trial and process evaluation has been obtained from the Human Research Ethics Committee at the Northern Sydney Local Health District (New South Wales) in Australia (project identifier: 2020/ETH02540). All participants are required to provide written consent after being informed about the trial and the process evaluation. The results of this process evaluation will be published in peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry (ACTRN12621000091808); Universal Trial Number (U1111-1264-1689).