Efficacy and feasibility of SENSory relearning of the UPPer limb (SENSUPP) in people with chronic stroke: A pilot randomized controlled trial.

Only 27 people took part and recruitment stopped early, at 27 instead of the planned 30, because of COVID-19. A pilot this size cannot establish whether the treatment works. More men than women were included, and the sensory relearning group started with worse shape and texture identification than the control group, so the two groups were not equal at the start; the authors chose not to adjust for this. The groups did not get the same amount of therapy: the control group received strength training, movement exercises and stretching in place of sensory relearning. This is not sensory training versus nothing, and the contribution of the sensory component cannot be separated from the rest of the programme. The one positive result is a single measure among many tested, and it was measured immediately after training and not maintained at three months (the between-group difference had gone by then). Everyone could already walk independently and grasp a small block, so the results say nothing about people with more severe motor impairment. Home training was not structured and no diary was kept, so how much extra practice people did is unknown. All assessments were done by one person and follow-up ended at three months.

The text supplied does not include a funding or competing-interest statement, so it is not possible to say who paid for the study or what the authors declared.

Do not read this as evidence that sensory relearning improves hand function. The only difference between the groups was on a touch threshold test straight after training; dexterity, daily hand use and participation did not differ, and this was a pilot of 27 people. The authors themselves call for larger trials to confirm the result.