CCT - Meaning
CCT - Meaning
CCT - Meaning
Abstract
Background: Currently, the key advocacy in neuroscientific studies for stroke rehabilitation is that therapy should
be directed towards task specificity performed with multiple repetitions. Circuit Class Therapy (CCT) is well suited to
accomplish multiple task-specific activities. However, while repetitive task practice is achievable with circuit class
therapy, in stroke survivors repetitive activities may be affected by poor neurologic inputs to motor units, resulting
in decreases in discharging rates which consequently may reduce the efficiency of muscular contraction. To accomplish
multiple repetitions, stroke survivors may require augmented duration of practice. To date, no study has examined the
effect of augmented duration of CCT in stroke rehabilitation, and specifically what duration of CCT is more effective in
influencing functional capacity among stroke survivors.
Methods/design: Using a randomised controlled trial with blinded outcome assessment, this study is aimed at
determining the effectiveness of structured augmented CCT in stroke rehabilitation. Sixty-eight stroke survivors (to be
recruited from a tertiary health institution in Kano, Northwest, Nigeria) will be randomised into one of four groups: three
intervention groups of differing CCT durations namely: 60 min, 90 min, and 120minuntes respectively, and a control
group. Participants will take part in an 8-week structured intensive CCT intervention. Participants will be assessed at
baseline, post-intervention, and six-month follow-up for the effectiveness of the varied durations of therapy, using
standardised tools. Based on the WHO-ICF model, the outcomes are body structure/function, activity limitation, and
participation restriction measures.
Discussion: It is expected that the outcome of this study will clarify whether increasing CCT duration leads to better
recovery of motor function in stroke survivors.
Trial registration: Pan African Clinical Trial Registry (PACTR): PACTR201311000701191
Keywords: Stroke, ICF model, Circuit class therapy, Exercise intensity, Neuro-rehabilitation
© 2015 Lawal et al. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://
creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
Lawal et al. BMC Neurology (2015) 15:88 Page 2 of 10
intensively in a meaningful and progressive way to suit Clinically, in CCT, participants are exposed to multiple
their respective needs; (ii) efficient utilisation of thera- progressively structured tasks to be accomplished within
pists’/trainees’ time; and (iii) it encompasses group dy- a session, and considering the pathophysiological chal-
namics such as peer support and social support [9, 11]. lenge of stroke survivors, they may need more time to
Several research trials have shown that CCT is effective perform multiple repetitions to enable neuroplastic changes.
in improving balance, transfers, gait, gait-related activ- Rose et al. [35] have proposed that planning the contents
ities (such as climbing stairs) and upper limb functions of a session in advance with predetermined progression of
in stroke survivors [12, 13], especially when applied tasks may allow more time for in-session practice.
within the first six months after stroke [12, 14–16] and In summary, pathophysiological and clinical factors may
even later [10, 13, 17–20]. in isolation or collectively support the need to examine the
The goal of CCT in stroke rehabilitation is to institute effect of augmented therapy time in CCT. However, while
an enduring motor learning in order to optimise motor there is a need to investigate the effect of augmenting the
and functional recovery necessary for the achievement duration of therapy, it is equally imperative to determine
of community reintegration of stroke survivors. To ac- how acceptable these CCT durations are among stroke
complish sustained motor learning, rehabilitation must survivors.
be geared towards a relatively permanent behavioural
change, which is currently believed to manifest as a re- Objective
sult of neuroplastic change in the brain itself [21]. Com- The objective of this study is to investigate the relative
pelling evidence from neuroscientific studies suggest effectiveness of augmented durations of CCT on the
that neuroplastic changes in the cerebral cortex and in functional capacity of stroke survivors. Additionally, the
other parts of the central nervous system (CNS) are the study will investigate the effectiveness of augmented dur-
physiological mechanism for effective motor skill retrain- ation of CCT on upper and lower extremity functions
ing following stroke [22–26]. These studies identified TST (with respect to body structure/function, activity limitation
and intensity of multiple repetitions as critical nexuses to and participation restriction) post-stroke and the accept-
enhancing neural reorganisation and “rewiring” in the ability of the various CCT durations among stroke survi-
CNS. By implication the damaged brain will therefore vors. For these to be achieved outcomes of interest will be
benefit from repeated sensorimotor inputs (efferent-affer- assessed based on the World Health Organisation Inter-
ent feedback loops) in order to remodel effectively for the national Classification of Function, Disability and Health
attainment of motor/functional recovery in stroke survi- model (WHO-ICF) [36].
vors. This signifies the need for rehabilitation professionals
to focus on meaningful, repetitive, and intensive specific Methods/Design
tasks during a rehabilitation session [27]. Study design/setting
Stroke survivors demonstrate poor activity tolerance This study is a randomised controlled trial of the effective-
[28] and performance [29]. These may suggest the need ness of augmented durations of a structured CCT model
for longer duration to tolerate and perform repetitive ac- in the rehabilitation of stroke survivors. All participants
tivities. The need to augment the duration of therapy in will be recruited from Aminu Kano Teaching Hospital
CCT for stroke survivors can be considered based on (AKTH) in Kano State, Northwest of Nigeria. The hospital
pathophysiologic and clinical domains. Pathophysiologic- (AKTH) is a tertiary health institution, situated in Kano,
ally, the sequelae of an upper motor neuron lesion result the most populous state in Nigeria, with over 9 million in-
in hemiparesis/hemiplegia, marred balance and coordin- habitants [37]. It is a 500-bed-capacity hospital that re-
ation and decreased proprioceptive feedback [30]. These ceives patients from within Kano and the neighbouring
put together will negatively affect daily activities and ex- states of Jigawa, Katsina, Kaduna, Bauchi and Zamfara
ercise performance, leading to activity intolerance, in- states. The patronage list comprises primarily the indigen-
creased energy cost of activity, and a decline in overall ous Hausa Fulani tribe, although Nigerians of other tribes
performance after stroke [27]. Cumulatively, these factors such as the Ibo and Yoruba ethnic groups also constitute a
result in longer reaction time and longer time to accom- sizeable number of the clientele.
plish tasks, thus suggesting the need to give adequate time
for the performance of multiple repetitive tasks in stroke Participants
survivors, well beyond age and gender-matched individ- Participants will include all stroke survivors in AKTH re-
uals without history of stroke. Four systematic reviews and ferred for physiotherapy by consulting physicians. How-
one Cochrane review have shown that augmentation of ever, only participants who meet the inclusion criteria will
exercise therapy and/or time of exercise therapy results in be considered for randomisation into the study groups
significant small to moderate gains in ADL, walking ability (involving intervention and control groups). Participants
and walking speed [31–34]. will be considered eligible if: stroke is ascertained to be
Lawal et al. BMC Neurology (2015) 15:88 Page 3 of 10
due to cerebrovascular accident; leading to unilateral at α = 0.05, a total sample size of 56 was generated, using
motor deficits [14]; they provide a written informed con- an estimated standard deviation (SD) for the calculation as
sent; they are adult stroke survivors of ≥18 years of age; on- adopted from a meta-analysis [9]. The 42.3 m was proposed
set of stroke is ≥30 days; they possess sufficient cognition as the minimum clinically important difference in walking
to participate (having a score of ≥24 points on mini-mental distance, based on previous studies of implicit measure-
state examination); they are willing to participate in an 8- ment error following repeated measurement of speed. The
week intensive CCT programme; have the ability to walk generated total sample size of 56, by implication, will give
for 10 m unsupported (walking aid is allowed); and have a 14 participants as samples for each group. To incorporate
minimum active wrist extension (2/5 on manual muscle drop-out to follow-up, we hope to recruit a total of 68 par-
testing). Participants will be considered ineligible if they ticipants (17 participants per group). The power calculation
present with precluding medical comorbidity to exercise, was conducted using G*Power version 3.0.10.
and history of any major surgical procedure significant
enough to interfere with performance (general or ortho- Randomisation and blinding
paedic) in an exercise therapy intervention. Randomisation will be conducted using a computer-
Stroke survivors who meet the eligibility criteria will be generated random allocation sequence schedule held by a
randomised into one of four arms of the study, including third party, who will randomly allocate recruited partici-
three intervention categories (60 min CCT, 90 min CCT pants into the study group (Fig. 1. outline of the study flow
and 120 min CCT) and one control (60 min standard diagram based on CONSORT [38]). To eliminate bias, the
physiotherapy). assessment of outcome will be performed by (experienced/
trained) blinded assessors, who will be blinded to the
Sample size and power calculation nature/type of intervention as well as the intervention
Using power calculations to detect a between-group differ- groups of the participants. Participants will also be
ence of 42.5 m (0.43 effect size) for a 4-group repeated instructed not to disclose their individual intervention
measure MANOVA in walking distance with 90 % power groups to the assessors.
Table 2 Circuit class therapy task specific activities for the intervention
Stations/description Prescribed tasks
Workstation 1
Tasks for warm-up specific for upper extremity
Active flexion- extension of shoulder, elbow and wrist joints
Abduction-adduction of shoulder joint
Upper extremity weight bearing on physiotherapy ball
Push-ups on physiotherapy ball or using chair arm rest
Workstation 2
Tasks for warm-up specific for lower extremity
Stretching the lower extremity (flexion/extension of the limb in supine or sitting position)
Marching on spot
Shuttle walking
Jogging on spot
Workstation 3
Tasks to achieve reaching, gripping and transferring light objects
Sitting with arm supported on high plinth at 90° shoulder flexion
Active protraction to push small objects (light ball) off edge of plinth to target the wall
Sitting same way to push weighted object (a heavier ball)
Active horizontal abduction and adduction to reach object (cup) on the wall
Use of protracted shoulder to open a door with patient standing three feet away from
the door
Wrist flexion/extension in gravity counter balance (provide a target to aim for)
Radial and ulnar deviation (in gravity counter balance) with a target to push (cup)
Picking light objects from table to the wall and back
Workstation 4
Tasks to achieve lower extremity flexibility and function
Timed shuttle walk/Initiation of minimal Shuttle jogging (50 % of time allotted for this
station)
Sit to stand from high chair with arm rest (placing affected leg behind the intact)
Stationary bike riding
Squatting activity using the wall bars
Workstation 5
Task to achieve upper extremity strength/control
Active shoulder flexion, extension and abduction with weight of varying sizes (dumbbells)
Active shoulder flexion, extension and abduction with resistant band to reach for a target
on the wall (cup)
Active shoulder abduction with weights of varying sizes (dumbbells), to reach for a target
on the wall
Active elbow flexion/extension with resistance band. Also substitute with varying weights
Active wrist flexion/extension, ulna/radial deviations with resistance band. Can be
substituted later with weights of varying sizes
Finger to nose movement
Rapid hand alternating movements
Workstation 5
Task to achieve upper extremity strength/control
Active shoulder flexion, extension and abduction with weight of varying sizes (dumbbells)
Lawal et al. BMC Neurology (2015) 15:88 Page 7 of 10
Table 2 Circuit class therapy task specific activities for the intervention (Continued)
Active shoulder flexion, extension and abduction with resistant band to reach for a target
on the wall (cup)
Active shoulder abduction with weights of varying sizes (dumbbells), to reach for a target
on the wall
Active elbow flexion/extension with resistance band. Also substitute with varying weights
Active wrist flexion/extension, ulna/radial deviations with resistance band. Can be
substituted later with weights of varying sizes
Finger to nose movement
Rapid hand alternating movements
Workstation 6
Task to achieve balance/coordination while walking
Sit to stand from lower chair without arm rest (affected leg behind a distant placed intact
leg)
Standing on foam eye closed (safety is key in this activity)
Carrying object while on shuttle walking (a tray with cup of water)
Walk up and down stairs (patient walk backward while coming down stairs)
Sudden stops and turns while walking
Obstacle crossing while walking
Figure 8 walking
Workstation seven
Task to achieve improved grip, precision and dexterity with upper extremity
Draw a line on the white board
Rolling a dumbbell forwards and backwards on a flat surface (table)
Open and close a window
Take lids off bottles
Bring object from table to mouth, vary size and weight of objects
Pour water from jug to cup
Mix water with spoon of various sizes
Take money in and out of a purse
Fold paper and place in an envelop
Trace pattern of different figures on white board
Workstation 8
Task to achieve lower extremity strength/control of gait
Walking different step length of parallel line
Obstacle crossing while walking with a tray of cups filled with water
Walking backward and side ways
Heel lift in standing without and with carrying an object
Walk on toes short distance forward and backward
Workstation 9
Task to achieve advanced motor task with upper extremity
Rolling pin pushing forward and backward
Reach, grasp and move objects to and from different heights
Wipe over windows
Wash, wring and peg clothing on lining rope
Paint sketched objects on cardboard paper
Use key boards to type
Lawal et al. BMC Neurology (2015) 15:88 Page 8 of 10
Table 2 Circuit class therapy task specific activities for the intervention (Continued)
Cut customised foams using knifes of varying sizes
Put-on common clothing and foot wears
Workstation 10
Tasks to achieve improved outdoor activities with lower extremity
Walking while picking objects from the floor
Walking through closely packed obstacles
Walking through tight space
Jumping on foam eyes closed
Walking on joined foams
Reverse walking on straight line
Treadmill walking/jogging
Speed stair climbing
Outdoor walking
NOTE:
1. Tasks within stations are not necessarily convenient and possible for all participants, choice is therefore individualized
2. Tasks in stations vary because it is not necessary for participants to undergo all activities and also to allow room for wide range of opportunities
and choices
3. Progression might be based on activities not initially possible within stations or based on modifications considered necessary by physiotherapist
4. Tasks are performed as structured in the model based on durations allotted for each group
Adapted from circuit class therapy intervention manual version 1.0 [56]
upper to lower extremity activities. This is to allow for methods) and functional activities for both upper and
adequate concentration, specificity of activity choice, and lower extremities. All the activities for the control group
distribution of equal activity duration for both upper and will be implemented by regular therapists (who are simi-
lower extremities. A minute change period (not within lar in qualification/experience to therapist implementing
specified duration of intervention) will be allowed for the CCT programme) in the Physiotherapy Department
crossing from one workstation to the next. of AKTH.
The intervention is an 8-week, 3-times weekly training
programme, giving a total of 24 sessions. Activities will Data analysis
be individualised allowing each participant to perform at Data will be recorded in Microsoft Excel before being
a level based on his/her ability, and progress steadily exported to Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS).
within the allotted time for each group. Both descriptive and inferential statistics will be used to
The upper extremity task-orientated CCT activities examine the outcomes of the study.
will include activities to improve fine motor skills, grasp Descriptive statistics of frequencies, percentages, mean,
and reach, sensory function, and proximal control. Simi- and standard deviation will all be used to describe baseline
larly, tasks for the lower extremity will be targeted to assessments and demographic characteristics of partici-
balance, strength, cardiovascular endurance, and retrain- pants. Where appropriate, they will also be used at post-
ing of gait mobility. All CCT sessions will be conducted intervention and follow-up to describe relevant findings.
by three trained physiotherapists, with each treatment Between-groups relative mean differences of the dependent
session structured at a 3:1 ratio of patients to therapists. variables, (spasticity, muscle strength, functional independ-
Table 2 (below) presents the CCT task-specific activities ence, ADL, functional capacity, gait speed, upper extremity
to be implemented in this study. function and impairment) will be determined using the
general linear model repeated measures, MANCOVA
Control group (standard physiotherapy) models (for each study domain, adjusted central on base-
The standard physiotherapy group, like the intervention line as covariates). If the MANCOVA is found to be signifi-
groups, will involve the same number of sessions (24), cant (Roy’s largest root), univariate between-groups results
duration (60 min) and frequency per week (3) of therapy. will be reported and pair-wise post hoc analysis will be per-
Standard physiotherapy will comprise one-to-one ther- formed using least significant difference.
apist/patient sessions engaging in impairment-centred A multiple regression analysis will be performed to in-
mobilisation techniques, standing balance (using varying vestigate the relation between improvement at different
Lawal et al. BMC Neurology (2015) 15:88 Page 9 of 10
20. Mudge S, Barber PA, Stott NS. Circuit-based rehabilitation improves gait 45. Tilley BC, Marler J, Geller NL, Lu M, Legler J, Brott T, et al. Use of a global
endurance but not usual walking activity in chronic stroke: a randomised test for multiple outcomes in stroke trials with application to the national
controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2009;90:1989–96. institute of neurological disorders and stroke t-PA stroke trial. Stroke.
21. Arya KN, Pandian S, Verma R, Garg RK. Movement therapy induced neural 1996;27:2136–42.
reorganisation and motor recovery in stroke: A review. J Body Mov Ther. 46. Shah S, Vanclay F, Cooper B. Improving the sensitivity of the Barthel Index
2011;15:528–37. for stroke rehabilitation. J Clin Epidemiol. 1989;42(8):703–9.
22. Chan DYL, Chan CCH, Au DKS. Motor relearning programme for stroke 47. Anderson K, Aito S, Biering-Søresen F, Charlifue S, Curt A, Ditunno J, et al.
patients: a randomised controlled trial. Clin Rehabil. 2006;20(3):191–200. Functional Recovery Measures for Spinal Cord Injury: An Evidence-Based
23. Gauthier LV, Taub E, Perkins C, Ortmann M, Mark VW, Uswatte G. Review for Clinical Practice and Research. J Spinal Cord Med. 2008;31:133–44.
Remodeling the brain: plastic structural brain changes produced by 48. Fulk GD, Echternach JL, Nof L, O’Sullivan S. Clinometric properties of the
different motor therapies after stroke. Stroke. 2008;39:1520–5. six-minute walk test in individuals undergoing rehabilitation poststroke.
24. Harvey RL. Improving Post stroke Recovery: Neuroplasticity and Task- Physiother Theory Pract. 2008;24:195–204.
Oriented Training. Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med. 2009;11:251–9. 49. Fulk GD, Echternach JL. Test-retest reliability and minimal detectable change
25. Jones TA, Allred RP, Adkins DL, Hsu JE, O’Bryant A, Maldonado MA. of gait speed in individuals undergoing rehabilitation after stroke. J Neurol
Remodeling the brain with behavioral experience after stroke. Stroke. Phys Ther. 2008;32(1):8–13.
2009;40(3 Suppl):S136–8. 50. Nijland R, van Wegen E, Verbunt J, van Wijk R, van Kordelaar J, Kwakkel G. A
26. Daly JJ, Ruff RL. Construction of efficacious gait and upper limb functional comparison of two validated tests for upper limb function after stroke: The
interventions based on brain plasticity evidence and model-based measures wolf motor function test and the action research arm test. J Rehabil Med.
for stroke patients. Scientific World Journal. 2007;20(7):2031–45. 2010;42:694–6.
27. Roth EJ, Harvey RL. Rehabilitation of stroke syndromes. In: Braddom RL, 51. Plats T, Eickhof C, Nuyens G, Vuadens P. Clinical scales for the assessment of
editor. Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. 2nd ed. Philadelphia, Pa: WB spasticity, associated phenomena, and function: a systematic review of the
Saunders; 2000. p. 1117–63. literature. Disabil Rehabil. 2005;27:7–18.
28. Gordon NF, Gulanick M, Costa F, Fletcher G, Franklin BA, Roth EJ, et al. 52. Uswatte G, Taub E, Morris D, Light K, Thompson P. The Motor Activity Log-28:
Physical activity and exercise recommendations for stroke survivors: an assessing daily use of the hemiparetic arm after stroke. Neurology.
American Heart Association scientific statement from the Council on Clinical 2006;67:1189–94.
Cardiology, Subcommittee on Exercise, Cardiac Rehabilitation, and 53. Lin K, Fu T, Wu C, Hsieh C. Assessing the stroke-specific quality of life for
Prevention; the Council on Cardiovascular Nursing; the Council on Nutrition, outcome measurement in stroke rehabilitation: minimal detectable change
Physical Activity, and Metabolism; and the Stroke Council. Stroke. and clinically important difference. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2011;9:5.
2004;35:1230–40. 54. Teixeira-Salmela LF, Gomes-Neto M, Magalhaes LC, Lima RCM, Faria CDCM.
29. MacKay-Lyons MJ, Howlett J. Exercise capacity and cardiovascular Content comparisons of stroke-specific quality of life based upon the
adaptations to aerobic training early after stroke. Top Stroke Rehabil. international classification of functioning, disability, and health. Qual Life
2005;12(1):31–44. Res. 2009;18:765–73.
30. Billinger SA, Coughenour E, MacKay-Lyons MJ, Ivey FM. Reduced cardiorespiratory 55. Hunsley J. Development of the treatment acceptability questionnaire.
fitness after stroke: biological consequences and exercise-induced adaptations. J Psychopathol Behav. 1992;14(1):55–64.
Stroke Res Treat. 2012;2012:959120. doi:10.1155/2012/959120. 11 pages. 56. English C, Hillier S. Circuit class therapy intervention manual version 1.0.
31. Kwakkel G, van Peppen R, Wagenaar RC, Wood DS, Richards C, Ashburn A, University of South Australia: International Centre for Allied Health Evidence;
et al. Effects of augmented exercise therapy time after stroke: a meta- 2012.
analysis. Stroke. 2004;35:2529–39.
32. French B, Thomas LH, Leathley MJ, Sutton CJ, McAdam J, Forster A, et al.
Repetitive task training for improving functional ability after stroke.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;4:CD006073.
33. Langhorne P, Coupar F, Pollock A. Motor recovery after stroke: a systematic
review. Lancet Neurol. 2009;8:741–54.
34. Veerbeek JM, Kwakkel G, van Wegen EE, Ket JC, Heymans MW. Early
prediction of outcome of activities of daily living after stroke: a systematic
review. Stroke. 2011;42:1482–8.
35. Rose D, Paris T, Crews E, Wu SS, Sun A, Behrman AL, et al. Feasibility and
effectiveness of circuit training in acute stroke rehabilitation. Neurorehabil
Neural Repair. 2011;25(2):140–8.
36. World Health Organisation. International Classification of Impairments,
Disabilities and Health. Geneva: WHO; 2001.
37. Population council. Report of Nigeria's National Population Commission on
the 2006 census source. Popul Dev Rev 2007; 33(1):206–210.
38. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D. CONSORT 2010 statement: updated
guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ. 2010;340:698–702.
39. Patrick E, Ada L. The Tardieu Scale differentiates contracture from spasticity
whereas the Ashworts Scale is confounded by it. Clin Rehabil.
2006;20(2):173–81. Submit your next manuscript to BioMed Central
40. Paulis WD, Horemans HLD, Brouwer BS, Stam HJ. Excellent test–retest and and take full advantage of:
inter-rater reliability for Tardieu Scale measurements with inertial sensors in
elbow flexors of stroke patients. Gait Posture. 2011;33:185–9.
• Convenient online submission
41. James MA. Use of the medical research council muscle strength grading
system in the upper extremity. J Hand Surg. 2007;32(2):154–6. • Thorough peer review
42. Youdas JW, Madson TJ, Hollman JH. Usefulness of the Trendelenburg test • No space constraints or color figure charges
for identification of patients with hip joint osteoarthritis. Physiother Theory
• Immediate publication on acceptance
Pract. 2010;26(3):184–94.
43. Noreau L, Vachon J. Comparison of three methods to assess muscular • Inclusion in PubMed, CAS, Scopus and Google Scholar
strength in individuals with spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord. 1998;36(10):716–23. • Research which is freely available for redistribution
44. Quinn TJ, Dawson J, Walters MR, Lees KR. Reliability of the Modified Rankin
Scale: A Systematic Review. Stroke. 2009;40:3393–5.
Submit your manuscript at
www.biomedcentral.com/submit