Poster Presentation Australian and New Zealand Stroke Organisation Conference 2026

Remote constraint induced therapy of the upper extremity (ReCITE): Evaluation of feasibility and implementation (#140)

Lauren J Christie 1 2 3 , Nicola Fearn 4 , Annie Mccluskey 5 , Natasha Lannin 6 7 , Christine Shiner 8 9 , Anna Kilkenny 10 11 , Jessamy Boydell 12 , Annie Meharg 13 , Leonid Churilov 14 , Laura Jolliffe 15 16 , Kate Makroglou 1 2 , Steven Faux 9 17 , Sandy Middleton 3
  1. Faculty of Health Science, Australian Catholic University, Sydney, NSW, Australia
  2. Allied Health Research Unit, St Vincent's Health Network Sydney, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia
  3. Nursing Research Institute, St Vincent's Health Network Sydney, St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne and Australian Catholic University, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia
  4. School of Health Sciences, University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, Australia
  5. The StrokeEd Collaboration, Ashfield, NSW, Australia
  6. Department of Neuroscience, Monash Univeristy, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  7. Alfred Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  8. Health Equity Research, St Vincent's Health Australia, Sydney, NSW, Australia
  9. School of Clinical Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia
  10. Centre for Health and Social Practice, Wintec, Te Pūkenga, New Zealand
  11. Align Health, Cambridge, New Zealand
  12. Arms Reach OT, Bristol, United Kingdom
  13. Private Practitioner, United Kingdom
  14. Melbourne Medical School, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
  15. Allied Health, Peninsula Health, Frankstown, Victoria, Australia
  16. Monash Translational Medicine, Monash Univeristy, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  17. Department of Rehabilitation, St Vincent's Health Network Sydney, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia

Background and Aims: Constraint-induced movement therapy (CIMT) is effective for arm recovery post-stroke, however there are barriers to its use in practice. Barriers include stroke survivors accessing daily face to face appointments, lack of clinician time and knowledge. We aimed to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of delivering CIMT via telehealth (TeleCIMT) to address these barriers.

Methods: Prospective mixed methods, single blinded design. Adult stroke survivors with mild to moderate upper limb impairment were recruited from four outpatient clinics. They received a 3 week, semi-supervised TeleCIMT program delivered within usual care. Therapists were supported by an implementation package designed using the Behaviour Change Wheel. Baseline, post-intervention and one month follow-up outcomes were recorded. Acceptability was evaluated through participant interviews. Data were analysed using inferential statistics and thematic analysis.

Results: Nineteen participants were recruited; 18 completed post-program measures. Most participants (n=15, 83.3%), completed >80% of planned intervention (> 24 hours of practice). Participants demonstrated significant improvements on the Action Research Arm Test (MD 6.3, 95%CI 2.2-10.4), Box and Block Test (MD 5 blocks, 95%CI 1.9-7.4) and self-reported amount of use and quality of arm movement (AoU MD 0.8, 95%CI 0.5-1.1; QoM MD 0.6, 95%CI 0.3-1.0; all p<0.05). TeleCIMT was acceptable to stroke survivors, with access to therapist coaching identified as being essential to maintain motivation. 

Conclusion: TeleCIMT may address inequities in accessing evidence-based stroke rehabilitation. It is feasible in practice and acceptable to stroke survivors.