Technology-supported sitting balance therapy versus usual care in the chronic stage after stroke: a pilot randomized controlled trial.

This was a pilot trial with 30 participants, so it was designed to test feasibility and safety rather than prove effectiveness. The therapist and participants were not blinded, which can make training and reporting of change more optimistic. The control group received usual care only, not an active comparison therapy, so the added time and attention of T-Chair therapy cannot be separated from the technology itself. Most participants already had a high level of independence in daily life (median Barthel Index above 18), so results may not apply to more disabled stroke survivors. There was no follow-up after the four-week intervention, so it is unknown whether gains lasted. Several outcomes were tested without correction for multiple comparisons, so some positive results may be chance findings. The pandemic may have made usual care less consistent than normal.

Funding came from Eurostars and Stiftelsen Promobilia. The supplied text does not report author conflicts of interest or say whether funders designed, analysed or wrote the study.

Do not conclude that T-Chair alone caused the improvements. Participants in the experimental group also received usual care (physiotherapy and/or occupational therapy with strength, conditioning and task-oriented exercises), and the T-Chair sessions combined exercises, visual feedback, gaming and therapist supervision, so the contribution of any single component cannot be separated. The trial was a pilot, had no active control and no follow-up, so it does not show that the gains will persist or that the device works in more dependent patients.