Skip to main content

A high-dose mobility booster program versus usual care for people after stroke: protocol for a pilot randomized trial

Abstract

Background

Maintaining mobility in the long term after stroke can be challenging. Furthermore, access to ongoing physiotherapy or exercise programs is limited. There is a need to investigate new models of service delivery to improve mobility in the longer term after stroke. A mobility booster program may be a solution, facilitating short-term access to physiotherapy on an as-needed basis. The aim of this project is to determine the feasibility of conducting a clinical trial of a short-term, high-dose mobility booster program (HiWalk) and measure clinical outcomes in order to estimate the power for a future efficacy trial.

Method

A multi-site, assessor-blinded pilot randomized trial will be undertaken to compare HiWalk in addition to usual care with usual care alone in 50 participants. Feasibility outcomes include recruitment, adherence, and safety. Clinical outcomes include walking speed, capacity and self-efficacy at 1-month and 6-months.

Discussion

A mobility booster program may be a successful way to deliver mobility training in the longer term after stroke. This pilot trial will progress the investigation of this model and assist in planning a future definitive trial. Most importantly, it will confirm the feasibility of delivering a novel high-dose, short-term booster program.

Trial registration

ANZCTR (ACTRN: ACTRN12623000316606p).

Peer Review reports

Background

Limitations to mobility are an ongoing problem after stroke. Although 70% of people after stroke regain mobility in the home [1], only 35–60% regain mobility in the community [1]. Mobility can also decline over time, with 21% of people experiencing a significant deterioration in their mobility between 1 and 3 years post stroke [1]. People after stroke often find it challenging to continue ongoing exercise, and daily physical activity is observed to be very low [2].

In many countries, including Australia, after discharge from the hospital, people after stroke are rarely offered support to improve or maintain their mobility and physical activity in the longer term [3, 4]. This means that people living with ongoing disability do not have the opportunity to achieve their preferred life goals. It is time to focus on how we best support people after stroke to maintain their mobility [4]. We propose a booster model, where a short-term, high-dose mobility program is offered as needed. People with stroke may have a particular mobility goal or have experienced a decline in mobility, meaning they need a boost of physiotherapy intervention, and more boosts may be required across the lifespan as further goals emerge or changes in performance occur.

HiWalk: a mobility booster program for community-dwelling people after stroke

We have designed a novel mobility booster program called HiWalk which has two main principles—(i) high-dose training which is (ii) delivered via a self-management approach. By high-dose training, we mean motor training completed daily for 3 weeks, directed towards the achievement of a specific mobility goal. This means the participant can focus on a goal for a short time and then move on to other life activities. By self-management, we mean equipping participants with the skills and support to continue this training independently in the medium to long term. There is evidence to support the effectiveness of a self-management approach for increasing physical activity after stroke [5]. The self-management program which has been embedded into the HiWalk program is Taking Charge after Stroke. Taking Charge is a structured approach to promoting self-directed rehabilitation and self-efficacy using goal-setting as well as information provision to people after stroke [6].

Proof of concept of HiWalk has been established [7]. We found that, on average, participants trained for 185 (SD 8) min and completed 1869 (SD 543) repetitions per day while attending 79% of scheduled sessions. Acceptability of the program was excellent with all participants reporting that they would recommend the program to others. Furthermore, there were minimal adverse events and no serious adverse events. The investigator team includes a consumer representative who has evaluated the acceptability measures for the pilot trial of HiWalk.

A pilot randomised trial will allow the feasibility of conducting a definitive trial of HiWalk to be tested. The findings will aid planning for a definitive trial by understanding the recruitment, intervention and measurement procedures, as well as obtaining estimates of variability that will be used for a power calculation. This protocol for the pilot trial aims to clearly articulate the novel high-dose intervention, allowing a review of the success of intervention delivery post the pilot trial.

Aim of the study

The aims of this study are as follows:

  1. 1.

    Determine the feasibility of conducting a randomised trial to investigate a mobility booster program (HiWalk) in community-dwelling people after stroke (i.e. recruiting and retaining participants, delivering the high dose intervention, the safety of the intervention and measuring clinical outcomes such as walking speed, balance, walking capacity, walking self-efficacy at 1 and 6 months), and

  2. 2.

    Estimate power for a definitive randomised trial based on the walking speed at 1 month.

Method

Design

A multi-site, assessor-blinded pilot randomized trial will be undertaken to compare HiWalk in addition to usual care with usual care alone (Fig. 1). Community-dwelling people after stroke will be recruited via advertisement, which will be distributed to relevant community groups such as stroke clubs and through professional networks. Outcome measures will be collected by a health professional who is trained in the procedures and blinded to group allocation. Participants will be asked not to discuss any aspect of the trial with the assessor to protect assessor blinding. The primary end-point will be at program completion (1 month). The secondary end-point will be at 6 months.

Fig. 1
figure 1

The flow of the 50 participants through the trial. Outcome timepoints and the two groups (HiWalk and usual care) are highlighted

Participants

Volunteers will be eligible to participate if they are as follows:

  1. 1.

    A community-dwelling adult with a diagnosis of stroke > 6 months and < 8 years ago

  2. 2.

    Able to walk without assistance from a person or aid over 10 m at a comfortable speed of 0.4–1.0 m/s

  3. 3.

    Willing to participate 5 days a week at a local site

They will be excluded from participating if they are as follows:

  1. 1.

    Unable to follow two-step instructions in English.

Randomization

Participants will be recruited in cohorts of 16–18 participants. The cohort will be stratified according to level of walking ability with participants ranked in descending order of comfortable walking speed over 5 m and then organised into consecutive pairs. Computer-generated, independent and concealed randomization will be used to assign each participant within the pair to either the experimental or control group. Each cohort will complete intervention before the next cohort is randomized.

Intervention

The experimental group will receive HiWalk for 3 weeks (up to 3 h a day, 5 days a week, totalling 45 h). HiWalk consists of motor training, i.e. strength, balance and mobility practice, delivered in a small group of 4–5 participants and 1 facilitator. Embedded throughout the program is a self-management approach where participants are guided through the Taking Charge program, i.e. they set individual mobility goals and are supported to complete self-directed practice [6]. HiWalk is led by a physiotherapist and sessions are facilitated by a physiotherapist, an exercise physiologist or an allied health assistant/student. A standardised assessment individualises the program which is reviewed weekly and is progressed in difficulty as appropriate. Sessions are completed in a rehabilitation gym.

Both groups may continue usual care (which may or may not include motor training) and will be recorded at baseline and 6 months. Further details of the intervention can be found in Appendix Table 3.

Outcome measures

The outcomes include the following:

  • 1. Feasibility measures (Table 1).

  • 2. Clinical measures (Table 2). All clinical outcomes will be measured at baseline, 1 month and 6 months. In addition, two outcomes (self-rated walking and community participation) will be collected at 2, 3, 4 and 5 months by phone.

Table 1 Feasibility outcomes
Table 2 Clinical outcomes

Sample size justification

Fifty participants (25 per group) are planned to use the results of this pilot trial to inform the power analysis for a future definitive trial [13, 14]. Our target of n = 50 allows us to estimate anticipated retention of 85% to within a margin of error of approximately 10% with 95% confidence.

Statistical analysis

Demographic data and feasibility outcomes will be presented using descriptive statistics. Mixed effects models will be used to adjust for the repeated measures over time. Estimated marginal means will be obtained to determine the difference in change from baseline between experimental and control groups with the multivariate-t method will be used to provide simultaneous 95% confidence intervals (CI). Trends in outcomes (self-reported walking performance and outings) will be described. Walking speed (fast) measured immediately post-intervention will be used in a power calculation for a definitive trial.

Discussion

Programs for chronic stroke can improve the performance of mobility [15, 16]. However, most mobility programs are relatively low dose (1–3 h per week) and occur over at least 6 weeks [15, 16]. HiWalk is a mobility booster program that is high-dose (15 h per week) over a short period (3 weeks). We hypothesise that improvements in mobility are possible in this short period due to the high dose of training that will be completed. Furthermore, research to date has found that improvements after participation in a mobility program are temporary and walking ability deteriorates over time. We hypothesise that this will also occur after HiWalk and that repeat boosters will be necessary.

Conclusion

This paper describes the protocol of a pilot randomised trial designed to investigate the feasibility of conducting a clinical trial of a high-dose mobility booster program for community-dwelling people after stroke. The data obtained in this trial will inform a future definitive clinical trial powered to detect clinically significant changes.

Data availability

Anonymised data from consenting participants will be stored in an open data repository managed by Macquarie University.

References

  1. Van De Port IG, Kwakkel G, Van Wijk I, Lindeman E. Susceptibility to deterioration of mobility long-term after stroke: a prospective cohort study. Stroke. 2006;37(1):167–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. English C, Manns PJ, Tucak C, Bernhardt J. Physical activity and sedentary behaviors in people with stroke living in the community: a systematic review. Phys Ther. 2014;94(2):185–96.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Grimley RS, Rosbergen IC, Gustafsson L, et al. Dose and setting of rehabilitation received after stroke in Queensland, Australia: a prospective cohort study. Clin Rehabil. 2020;34:812–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Scrivener K, Dean C, Cameron ID, Ada L. Stroke in Australia: long term survivors have fallen into a black hole. Med J Aust. 2022;217(6):290.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Sakakibara BM, Kim AJ, Eng JJ. A systematic review and meta-analysis on self-management for improving risk factor control in stroke patients. Int J Behav Med. 2017;24(1):42–53.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Fu V, Weatherall M, McPherson K, Taylor W, McRae A, Thomson T, et al. Taking charge after stroke: a randomized controlled trial of a person-centered, self-directed rehabilitation intervention. Int J Stroke. 2020;15(9):954–64.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Ball AE, Glinsky J, Scrivener K. The feasibility of a short duration, intensive, multidisciplinary and self-managed approach to improve mobility for community stroke survivors. Int J Stroke. 2022;17(1_SUPPL):14–5.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Richards CL, Malouin F, Dean C. Gait in stroke: assessment and rehabilitation. Clin Geriatr Med. 1999;15(4):833–56.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Macchiavelli A, Giffone A, Ferrarello F, Paci M. Reliability of the six-minute walk test in individuals with stroke: systematic review and meta-analysis. Neurol Sci. 2021;42:81–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Hong SJ, Goh EY, Chua SY, Ng SS. Reliability and validity of step test scores in subjects with chronic stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2012;93(6):1065–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Ada L, Dean CM, Lindley RI. Randomised trial of treadmill training to improve walking in community dwelling people after stroke: the AMBULATE trial. Int J Stroke. 2013;27(1):436–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Dorman PJ, Waddell F, Slattery J, Dennis M, Sandercock P. Is the EuroQol a valid measure of health-related quality of life after stroke? Stroke. 1997;28(10):1876–82.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Whitehead AL, Julious SA, Cooper CL, Campbell MJ. Estimating the sample size for a pilot randomised trial to minimise the overall trial sample size for the external pilot and main trial for a continuous outcome variable. Stat Methods Med Res. 2016;25(3):1057–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Harvey LA. Feasibility and pilot studies pave the way for definitive trials. Spinal Cord. 2018;56(8):723–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Dean CM, Rissel C, Sherrington C, Sharkey M, Cumming RG, Lord SR, et al. Exercise to enhance mobility and prevent falls after stroke: the community stroke club randomized trial. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2012;26(9):1046–57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Pang MY, Eng JJ, Dawson AS, McKay HA, Harris JE. A community-based fitness and mobility exercise program for older adults with chronic stroke: a randomized, controlled trial. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2005;53(10):1667–74.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Harris PA, Taylor R, Minor BL, Elliott V, Fernandez M, O’Neal L, & REDCap Consortium. The REDCap consortium: building an international community of software platform partners. J Biomed Inform. 2019;95:103208

Download references

Acknowledgements

Physiotherapy team members at Concentric Healthcare Services who reviewed and provided feedback on the HiWalk program and materials.

Funding

This study was supported by funding from the Stroke Foundation (Australia; 2023, Early and Early-Mid Career Researcher Seed Grant/EMCRSeed2312). NAL is supported by a Future Leader Fellowship from the National Heart Foundation of Australia (GNT 106762).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

KS designed the pilot trial with support from NL, LA and CD. EB and JG collaborated with KS to design the HiWalk intervention. KF and NY reviewed and refined the HiWalk intervention. PG informed the statistical analysis. KS and LA drafted the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Natasha A. Lannin.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Ethics approval has been provided by the Macquarie University Human Research Ethics Committee Medical Sciences (REF 520231306850151) and the trial has been prospectively registered (ACTRN12623000316606p). Written consent will be obtained from participants by a team member who confirms eligibility for the study. Data for this trial will be de-identified during collection. All data will be collected on paper forms and then managed using REDCap electronic data capture tools hosted at Macquarie University [17]. Data will be anonymised for archiving and stored in a data repository.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

Table 3 Tidier checklist describing the experimental and control interventions

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Scrivener, K., Ball, E., Dean, C. et al. A high-dose mobility booster program versus usual care for people after stroke: protocol for a pilot randomized trial. Pilot Feasibility Stud 11, 31 (2025). https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1186/s40814-025-01613-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1186/s40814-025-01613-9

Keywords