Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41204366›Full record

ArticlePilot and feasibility studies2025

UPBEAT Trial: a randomised feasibility evaluation of a digital system for UPper limB rEhabilitation After sTroke.

Gianpaolo Fusari, Sarah Coleman, Jane Davies, Jeremy Dearling, Joanne Findlay, Mark Goddard, Nicola Ivins, Fiona Jones, Fiona Leggat, Rachel Lowe and 11 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pilot and feasibility studies, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

21 authors.

Gianpaolo FusariHelix Centre, Institute of Global Health Innovation, Imperial College London, London, England, UK. g.fusari@imperial.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7263-3398
Sarah ColemanKingston and Richmond NHS Foundation Trust, London, England, UK.
Jane DaviesCentre for Trials Research, School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, Wales, UK.
Jeremy DearlingHelix Centre, Institute of Global Health Innovation, Imperial College London, London, England, UK.
Joanne FindlayDiscover-NOW, Imperial College Health Partners, London, UK.
Mark GoddardCentre for Trials Research, School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, Wales, UK.
Nicola IvinsCentre for Trials Research, School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, Wales, UK.
Fiona JonesPopulation Health Research Institute, City St George's University of London, London, England, UK.
Fiona LeggatPopulation Health Research Institute, City St George's University of London, London, England, UK.
Rachel LoweCentre for Trials Research, School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, Wales, UK.
Clare McCruddenHelix Centre, Institute of Global Health Innovation, Imperial College London, London, England, UK.
Richard McKinlayCentral London Community Healthcare NHS Trust, London, England, UK.
Ebenezar Ndachi EffiangDiscover-NOW, Imperial College Health Partners, London, UK.
Louise PennyImperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, England, UK.
Rebecca PlayleCentre for Trials Research, School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, Wales, UK.
Davina RichardsonImperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, England, UK.
Muhammad RiazCentre for Trials Research, School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, Wales, UK.
Leila ShepherdHelix Centre, Institute of Global Health Innovation, Imperial College London, London, England, UK.
Tongtong ShiCentre for Trials Research, School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, Wales, UK.
Tomasz SzymanskiDiscover-NOW, Imperial College Health Partners, London, UK.
Ara DarziHelix Centre, Institute of Global Health Innovation, Imperial College London, London, England, UK.

Funding

NHS England SBRIH18P2002
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundStroke rehabilitation is essential, yet many stroke survivors receive insufficient therapy, particularly for arm function. The 2023 UK National Stroke Guidelines recommend ongoing rehabilitation, but resource constraints limit therapy intensity. Digital interventions, such as OnTrack-a wearable system co-designed with stroke survivors, carers and therapists-offer a scalable self-management solution for rehabilitation. This study evaluates the feasibility of implementing OnTrack within NHS stroke services and informs a future RCT.

methodsA two-arm, parallel-group randomised feasibility trial conducted across three NHS sites. Stroke survivors (n = 30) with arm weakness within 12 months post-stroke were randomised 1:1 to receive either OnTrack plus usual care or usual care alone. The primary outcome was the recruitment rate. Secondary feasibility outcomes included retention, adherence, and intervention fidelity. Secondary clinical measures assessed arm function (MAL-14), self-efficacy (SSEQ), quality of life (EQ-5D-5L), and usability (SUS). A process evaluation explored intervention fidelity and implementation experiences. A preliminary economic evaluation examined data collection feasibility using the Client Service Receipt Inventory (CSRI) and a per-patient costing of the OnTrack intervention.

resultsThirty participants out of a target of 42 (71.4%) were randomised, with 24/30 (80%) retained at 12 weeks. Intervention adherence was high with participants engaging with OnTrack an average of 6.3 days per week (90.7%). Fidelity of intervention delivery was modest (53.9%), highlighting areas for therapist training improvements. Trends suggested improvements in arm function and self-efficacy across groups. The preliminary economic evaluation confirmed the feasibility of data collection using CSRI, though limitations in accuracy and completeness were identified. A per-patient costing of the OnTrack intervention was achieved. Apparent cost differences between groups, identified through a preliminary cost-consequence analysis, were influenced by an unbalanced distribution of reported service use and should be interpreted with caution.

conclusionsUPBEAT demonstrated the feasibility of delivering OnTrack in NHS stroke services, with strong retention and adherence. Findings support the potential for a future full-scale RCT, with refinements needed in recruitment procedures, therapist training, and economic data collection methods. Digital self-management tools like OnTrack may offer a scalable approach to increasing rehabilitation intensity, addressing gaps in stroke recovery pathways.

trial registrationUPBEAT Feasibility Trial, IRAS: 323576, CPMS: 59352. Approved by London Surrey REC on 14/12/2023.

Indexed as

Digital health interventionFeasibility trialHealth economic assessmentNHS stroke pathwayProcess evaluationSelf-directed therapyStroke rehabilitationWearable technology

Identifiers

PMID41204366
PMCPMC12593889

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.