Literature DB >> 26510934

Compensatory Versus Noncompensatory Shoulder Movements Used for Reaching in Stroke.

Mindy F Levin1, Dario G Liebermann2, Yisrael Parmet3, Sigal Berman3.   

Abstract

Background The extent to which the upper-limb flexor synergy constrains or compensates for arm motor impairment during reaching is controversial. This synergy can be quantified with a minimal marker set describing movements of the arm-plane. Objectives To determine whether and how (a) upper-limb flexor synergy in patients with chronic stroke contributes to reaching movements to different arm workspace locations and (b) reaching deficits can be characterized by arm-plane motion. Methods Sixteen post-stroke and 8 healthy control subjects made unrestrained reaching movements to targets located in ipsilateral, central, and contralateral arm workspaces. Arm-plane, arm, and trunk motion, and their temporal and spatial linkages were analyzed. Results Individuals with moderate/severe stroke used greater arm-plane movement and compensatory trunk movement compared to those with mild stroke and control subjects. Arm-plane and trunk movements were more temporally coupled in stroke compared with controls. Reaching accuracy was related to different segment and joint combinations for each target and group: arm-plane movement in controls and mild stroke subjects, and trunk and elbow movements in moderate/severe stroke subjects. Arm-plane movement increased with time since stroke and when combined with trunk rotation, discriminated between different subject groups for reaching the central and contralateral targets. Trunk movement and arm-plane angle during target reaches predicted the subject group. Conclusions The upper-limb flexor synergy was used adaptively for reaching accuracy by patients with mild, but not moderate/severe stroke. The flexor synergy, as parameterized by the amount of arm-plane motion, can be used by clinicians to identify levels of motor recovery in patients with stroke.
© The Author(s) 2015.

Entities:  

Keywords:  adaptation; arm movement; compensation; kinematics; recovery; rehabilitation

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26510934     DOI: 10.1177/1545968315613863

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neurorehabil Neural Repair        ISSN: 1545-9683            Impact factor:   3.919


  27 in total

Review 1.  Motor compensation and its effects on neural reorganization after stroke.

Authors:  Theresa A Jones
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurosci       Date:  2017-03-23       Impact factor: 34.870

2.  Effect of the Triceps Brachii Facilitation Technique on Scapulohumeral Muscle Activation during Reach and Point in a Healthy Population.

Authors:  Olive Lennon; Kaushika Logeswaran; Srushti Mistry; Tara Moore; Giacomo Severini; Catherine Cornall; Cliona O'Sullivan; Ulrik McCarthy Persson
Journal:  Physiother Can       Date:  2019       Impact factor: 1.037

Review 3.  Optimizing functional outcome endpoints for stroke recovery studies.

Authors:  Mustafa Balkaya; Sunghee Cho
Journal:  J Cereb Blood Flow Metab       Date:  2019-09-14       Impact factor: 6.200

4.  Estimating the Threshold Value for Change for the Six Dimensions of the Impairment Inventory of the Chedoke-McMaster Stroke Assessment.

Authors:  Rachel Beyer; Caitlin Wharin; Ellen Gillespie; Kathleen Odumeru; Paul W Stratford; Patricia A Miller
Journal:  Physiother Can       Date:  2019       Impact factor: 1.037

5.  Targeted box and blocks test: Normative data and comparison to standard tests.

Authors:  Kimberly Kontson; Ian Marcus; Barbara Myklebust; Eugene Civillico
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-05-19       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Spasticity may obscure motor learning ability after stroke.

Authors:  Sandeep K Subramanian; Anatol G Feldman; Mindy F Levin
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2017-09-13       Impact factor: 2.714

7.  A low-dimensional representation of arm movements and hand grip forces in post-stroke individuals.

Authors:  Christoph M Kanzler; Giuseppe Averta; Olivier Lambercy; Matteo Bianchi; Anne Schwarz; Jeremia P O Held; Roger Gassert; Antonio Bicchi; Marco Santello
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-05-09       Impact factor: 4.996

8.  Does the Finger-to-Nose Test measure upper limb coordination in chronic stroke?

Authors:  Marcos R M Rodrigues; Matthew Slimovitch; Gevorg Chilingaryan; Mindy F Levin
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2017-01-23       Impact factor: 4.262

9.  Trajectory formation principles are the same after mild or moderate stroke.

Authors:  Denis Mottet; Liesjet Elisabeth Henriette van Dokkum; Jérôme Froger; Abdelkader Gouaïch; Isabelle Laffont
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-03-22       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Post-stroke kinematic analysis in rats reveals similar reaching abnormalities as humans.

Authors:  Gustavo Balbinot; Clarissa Pedrini Schuch; Matthew S Jeffers; Matthew W McDonald; Jessica M Livingston-Thomas; Dale Corbett
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-06-07       Impact factor: 4.379

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.