Skip to main content
×
×
Home
  • Print publication year: 2014
  • Online publication date: June 2014

Chapter 29 - Contemporary concepts in upper extremity rehabilitation

from Section 4 - Symptom-specific neurorehabilitation: sensory and motor dysfunctions
Recommend this book

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this book to your organisation's collection.

Textbook of Neural Repair and Rehabilitation
  • Online ISBN: 9780511995590
  • Book DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511995590
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to *
×

References

1. Kwakkel G, Kollen BJ, van der Grond J, et al. Probability of regaining dexterity in the flaccid upper limb: impact of severity of paresis and time since onset in acute stroke. Stroke 2003; 34: 2181–6.
2. Ghez C. Muscles: effectors of the motor systems. In Kandell ER, Schwartz JH, Jessell TM, eds. Principles of Neural Science. Norwalk, CT: Appleton and Lange, 1991; 548.
3. Fellows S, Kaus C, Thilmann AS. Voluntary movement at the elbow in spastic hemiparesis. Ann Neurol 1994; 36: 397–406.
4. Gowland, C., deBruin, H, Basmajian JV, et al. Agonist and antagonist activity during voluntary upper-limb movement in patients with stroke. Phys Ther 1992; 72: 624–33.
5. Sahrmann S, Norton B. The relationship of voluntary movement to spasticity in the upper motor neuron syndrome. Ann Neurol 1977; 2: 460–5.
6. Ng S, Shepherd R. Weakness in patients with stroke: implications for strength training in neurorehabilitation. Phys Ther Rev 2000; 5: 227–38.
7. Bourbonnais D, Van den Noven S. Weakness in patients with hemiparesis. Am J Occup Ther 1989; 43: 313–19.
8. Smidt G, Rogers M. Factors contributing to the regulation and clinical assessment of muscular strength. Phys Ther 1982; 62: 1283–90.
9. Frontera WR, Moldover JR, Borg-Stein J, et al. Exercise. In Gonzalez EG, Myers SJ, Edelstein JE, et al. eds. Downey and Darling's Physiological Basis of Rehabilitation Medicine. Boston: Butterworth-Heinemann, 2001; 379–96.
10. Maughan RJ, Watson JS, Weir J. Strength and cross-sectional area of human skeletal muscle. J Physiol 1983; 338: 37–49.
11. Deschenes MR, Kraemer WJ. Performance and physiologic adaptations to resistance training. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2002; 81: S3–16.
12. Conrad MO, Kamper DG. Isokinetic strength and power deficits in the hand following stroke. Clin Neurophysiol 2012; 123: 1200–6.
13. McCrea PH, Eng JJ, Hodgson AJ. Time and magnitude of torque generation is impaired in both arms following stroke. Muscle Nerve 2003; 28: 46–53.
14. Andrews AW, Bohannon RW. Distribution of muscle strength impairments following stroke. Clin Rehabil 2000; 14: 79–87.
15. Colebatch JG, Gandevia SC. The distribution of muscular weakness in upper motor neuron lesions affecting the arm. Brain 1989; 112: 749–63.
16. Jung HY, Yoon JS, Park BS. Recovery of proximal and distal arm weakness in the ipsilateral upper limb after stroke. Neurorehabilitation 2002; 17: 153–9.
17. Canning CG, Ada L, Adams R, et al. Loss of strength contributes more to physical disability after stroke than loss of dexterity. Clin Rehabil 2004; 18: 300–8.
18. Mercier C, Bourbonnais D. Relative shoulder flexor and handgrip strength is related to upper limb function after stroke. Clin Rehabil 2004; 18: 215–21.
19. Sunderland A, Tinson D, Bradley L, et al. Arm function after stroke: an evaluation of grip strength as a measure of recovery and a prognostic indicator. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1989; 52: 1267–72.
20. Bohannon RW, Warren ME, Cogman KA. Motor variables correlated with the hand-to-mouth maneuver in stroke patients. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1991; 72: 682–4.
21. Chae J, Yang G, Park BK, et al. Muscle weakness and cocontraction in upper limb hemiparesis: relationship to motor impairment and physical disability. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2002; 16: 241–8.
22. Harris JE, Eng JJ. Strength training improves upper-limb function in individuals with stroke: a meta-analysis. Stroke 2010; 41: 136–40.
23. Alberts J, Butler A, Wolf SL. Improved force control among patients with sub-acute stroke after constraint-induced therapy. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2004; 18: 250–8.
24. Bobath B. Adult Hemiplegia: Evaluation and Treatment. London: Butterworth–Heinemann, 1990.
25. Riolo L, Fisher K. Is there evidence that strength training could help improve muscle function and other outcomes without reinforcing abnormal movement patterns or increasing reflex activity in a man who has had a stroke? Phys Ther 2003; 83: 844–51.
26. Engardt M, Knutsson E, Jonsson M. et al. Dynamic muscle strength training in stroke patients: effects on knee extension torque, electromyographic activity, and motor function. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1995; 76: 419–25.
27. Sharp SA, Brouwer BJ. Isokinetic strength training of the hemiparetic knee: effects on function and spasticity. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1997; 78: 1231–6.
28. Teixeira-Salmela LF, Olney SJ, Nadeau S, et al. Muscle strengthening and physical conditioning to reduce impairment and disability in chronic stroke survivors. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1999; 80: 1211–18.
29. Badics E, Wittmann A, Rupp M, et al. Systematic muscle building exercises in the rehabilitation of stroke patients. Neurorehabilitation, 2002;17: 211–14.
30. Butefisch C, Hummelsheim H, Denzler P, et al. Repetitive training of isolated movements improves the outcome of motor rehabilitation of the centrally paretic hand. J Neurol Sci 1995; 130: 59–68.
31. Kagawa S, Koyama T, Hosami M, et al. Effects of constraint-induced movement therapy on spasticity in patients with hemiparesis after stroke. J Stroke Cerebrovascul Dis 2013; 22: 364–70.
32. Heller A, Wade DT, Wood VA, et al. Arm function after stroke: measurement and recovery over the first three months. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1987; 50: 714–19.
33. Nakayama H, Jorgensen HS, Raaschou HO, et al. Recovery of upper extremity function in stroke patients: the Copenhagen Stroke Study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1994; 75: 394–8.
34. Wade DT, Langton-Hewer R, Wood VA, et al. The hemiplegic arm after stroke: measurement and recovery. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1983; 46: 521–4.
35. Devetten G, Coutts SB, Hill MD, et al. Acute corticospinal tract Wallerian degeneration is associated with stroke outcome. Stroke 2010; 41: 751–6.
36. Hatakenaka M, Miyai I, Sakoda S, et al. Proximal paresis of the upper extremity in patients with stroke. Neurology 2007; 69: 348–55.
37. Riley JD, Le V, Der-Yeghiaian L, et al. Anatomy of stroke injury predicts gains from therapy. Stroke 2011; 42: 421–6.
38. Stinear C. Prediction of recovery of motor function after stroke. Lancet Neurol 2010; 9: 1228–32.
39. Stinear CM, Barber PA, Smale PR, et al. Functional potential in chronic stroke patients depends on corticospinal tract integrity. Brain 2007; 130: 170–80.
40. van Kuijk AA, Pasman JW, Hendricks HT, et al. Predicting hand motor recovery in severe stroke: the role of motor evoked potentials in relation to early clinical assessment. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2009; 23: 45–51.
41. Knopman DS, Rubens AB. The validity of computed tomographic scan findings for the localization of cerebral functions: the relationship between computed tomography and hemiparesis. Arch Neurol 1986; 43: 328–32.
42. Shelton FN, Reding MJ. Effect of lesion location on upper limb motor recovery after stroke. Stroke 2001; 32: 107–12.
43. Marshall RS, Zarahn E, Alon L, et al. Early imaging correlates of subsequent motor recovery after stroke. Ann Neurol 2009; 65: 596–602.
44. Rijntjes M., Hamzei F, Glauche V, et al. Activation changes in sensorimotor cortex during improvement due to CIMT in chronic stroke. Restor Neurol Neurosci 2011; 29: 299–310.
45. Feys H, Van Hees J, Bruyninckx F, et al. Value of somatosensory and motor evoked potentials in predicting arm recovery after a stroke. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2000; 68: 323–31.
46. Andrews K, Brockhurst JC, Richards B, et al. The rate of recovery from stroke and its measurement. Int Rehabil Med 1981; 3: 155–61.
47. Broeks JG, Lankhorst GJ, Rumping K, et al. The long-term outcome of arm function after stroke: results of a follow-up study. Disabil Rehabil 1999; 21: 357–64.
48. Olsen TS. Arm and leg paresis as outcome predictors in stroke rehabilitation. Stroke 1990; 21: 247–51.
49. Twitchell TE. The restoration of motor function following hemiplegia in man. Brain 1951; 74: 443–80.
50. Hendricks HT, van Limbeek J, Geurts AC, et al. Motor recovery after stroke: a systematic review of the literature. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2002; 83: 1629–37.
51. Fritz SL, Light KE, Patterson TS, et al. Active finger extension predicts outcomes after constraint-induced movement therapy for individuals with hemiparesis after stroke. Stroke 2005; 36: 1172–7.
52. Smania N, Paolucci S, Tinazzi M, et al. Active finger extension: a simple movement predicting recovery of arm function in patients with acute stroke. Stroke 2007; 38: 1088–90.
53. Beebe JA, Lang CE. Absence of a proximal to distal gradient of motor deficits in the upper extremity early after stroke. Clin Neurophysiol 2008; 119: 2074–85.
54. Beebe JA, Lang CE. Active range of motion predicts upper extremity function 3 months after stroke. Stroke 2009; 40: 1772–9.
55. Nijland RH, van Wegen EE, Harmeling-van der Wel BC, et al. Presence of finger extension and shoulder abduction within 72 hours after stroke predicts functional recovery: early prediction of functional outcomes after stroke: the EPOS cohort study. Stroke 2010; 41: 745–50.
56. Winstein C, Wing A, Whitall J. Motor control and learning principles for rehabilitation of upper limb movements after brain injury. In Grafman J, Robertson IH, eds. Handbook of Neuropsychology. Vol. 9. New York, NY: Elsevier Science BV, 2003; 77–137.
57. Wolf SL, Binder-MacLeod SA.. Electromyographic biofeedback applications to the hemiplegic patient. Changes in upper extremity neuromuscular and functional status. Phys Ther 1983; 63: 1393–403.
58. Barreca S, Wolf SL, Fasoli S, et al. Treatment interventions for the paretic upper limb of stroke survivors: a critical review. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2003; 17: 220–6.
59. Basmajian JV, Gowland CA, Finlayson MA, et al. Stroke treatment: comparison of integrated behavioral–physical therapy vs traditional physical therapy programs. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1987; 68: 267–72.
60. Dickstein R, Hocherman S, Pillar T, et al. Stroke rehabilitation: three exercise therapy approaches. Phys Ther 1986; 66: 1233–8.
61. Gelber D, Josefczyk PB, Herrman D, et al. Comparison of two therapy approaches in the rehabilitation of the pure motor hemiparetic stroke patient. J Neurol Rehabil 1995; 9: 191–6.
62. Kwakkel G, Wagenaar RC, Koelman TW, et al. Effects of intensity of rehabilitation after stroke: a research synthesis. Stroke 1997; 28: 1550–6.
63. Logigian M, Samuels MA, Falconer J, et al. Clinical exercise trial for stroke patients. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1983; 64: 364–7.
64. van der Lee JH, Wagenaar RC, Lankhorst GJ, et al. Forced use of the upper extremity in chronic stroke patients: results from a single-blind randomized clinical trial. Stroke 1999; 30: 2369–75.
65. van der Lee JH, Snels IA, Beckerman H, et al. Exercise therapy for arm function in stroke patients: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Clin Rehabil 2001; 15: 20–31.
66. Woldag H, Hummelsheim H. Evidence-based physiotherapeutic concepts for improving arm and hand function in stroke patients: a review. J Neurol 2002; 249: 518–28.
67. Bode RK, Heinemann AW, Semik P, et al. Relative importance of rehabilitation therapy characteristics on functional outcomes for persons with stroke. Stroke 2004; 35: 2537–42.
68. Horn SD, DeJong G, Smout RJ, et al. Stroke rehabilitation patients, practice, and outcomes: is earlier and more aggressive therapy better? Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2005; 86: S101–14.
69. Hu M, Hsu S, Yip P, et al. Early and intensive rehabilitation predicts good functional outcomes in patients admitted to the stroke intensive care unit. Disabil Rehabil 2010; 32: 1251–9.
70. Kwakkel G, Kollen BJ, Lindeman E. Understanding the pattern of functional recovery after stroke: facts and theories. Restor Neurol Neurosci 2004; 22: 281–99.
71. Salters K, Jutai J, Hartley M, et al. Impact of early vs. delayed admission to rehabilitation on functional outcomes in persons with stroke. J Rehabil Med 2006; 38: 113–17.
72. Teassell R, Foley N, Salter K. Evidence based review of stroke rehabilitation. Outcome Measures in Stroke Rehabilitation. Available from: http://www.ebrsr.com [Accessed December 2, 2011.]
73. Rodgers H, Mackintosh J, Price C, et al.Does an early increased-intensity interdisciplinary upper limb therapy programme following acute stroke improve outcome? Clin Rehabil 2003; 17: 579–89.
74. Dromerick AW, Lang CE, Birkenmeier RL, et al. Very early constraint-i induced movement during stroke rehabilitation (VECTORS): a single-center RCT. Neurology 2009; 73: 195–201.
75. Blennerhassett J, Dite W. Additional task-related practice improves mobility and upper limb function early after stroke: a randomised controlled trial. Aust J Physiother 2004; 50: 219–24.
76. Cooke EV, Mares K, Clark A, et al. The effects of increased dose of exercise-based therapies to enhance motor recovery after stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Med 2010; 8: 60.
77. Rutherford OM. Muscular coordination and strength training: implications for rehabilitation. Sports Med 1988; 5: 196–202.
78. Pak S, Patten C. Strengthening to promote functional recovery poststroke: an evidence-based review. Top Stroke Rehabil 2008; 15: 177–99.
79. Patten C, Dozono J, Schmidt S, et al. Combined functional task practice and dynamic high intensity resistance training promotes recovery of upper-extremity motor function in post-stroke hemiparesis: a case study. J Neurol Phys Ther 2006; 30: 99–115.
80. Winstein C, Rose D, Tan SM, et al. A randomized controlled comparison of upper extremity rehabilitation strategies in acute stroke: a pilot study of immediate and long-term outcomes. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2004; 85: 620–8.
81. Grotta JC, Jacobs TP, Koroshetz WJ, et al. Stroke program review group: an interim report. Stroke 2008; 39: 1364–70.
82. Winstein CJ, Wolf SL. Task-oriented training to promote upper extremity recovery. In Stein J, Harvey RL, Macko RE, et al., eds. Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation. New York, NY: Demos Medical, 2009.
83. Trombly CA, Wu C. Effect of rehabilitation tasks on organization of movement after stroke. Am J Occup Ther 1999; 53: 333–44.
84. van Vliet P, Sheridan M, Kerwin DG, et al. The influence of functional goals on the kinematics of reaching following stroke. Neuroreport 1995; 19: 11–16.
85. Wu C, Trombly CA, Lin K, et al. Effects of object affordances on reaching performance in persons with and without cerebrovascular accident. Am J Occup Ther 1998; 52: 447–56.
86. Taub E, Uswatte G, Elbert T. New treatments in neurorehabilitation founded on basic research. Nat Rev Neurosci 2002; 3: 228–36.
87. Wolf SL, Blanton S, Baer H, et al. Repetitive task practice: a critical review of constraint-induced movement therapy in stroke. Neurologist 2002; 8: 325–38.
88. Wolf SL. On “Modified constraint-induced therapy…” Phys Ther 2008; 88: 680–4.
89. Wolf, S.L., Thompson, P.A., et al. The EXCITE stroke trial: comparing early and delayed constraint-induced movement therapy. Stroke 2010; 41: 2309–15.
90. Wolf SL, Winstein CJ, Miller JP, et al. Effect of constraint-induced movement therapy on upper extremity function 3 to 9 months after stroke: the EXCITE randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2006; 296: 2095–104.
91. Jang SH, Kim YH, Cho SH, et al. Cortical reorganization induced by task-oriented training in chronic hemiplegic stroke patients. Neuroreport 2003; 14: 137–41.
92. Wittenberg GF, Schaechter JD. The neural basis of constraint-induced movement therapy. Curr Opin Neurol 2009; 22: 582–8.
93. Cramer SC, Weisskoff RM, Schaechter JD, et al. Motor cortex activation is related to force of squeezing. Hum Brain Mapp 2002; 16: 197–205.
94. Liepert J, Miltner WH, Bauder H, et al. Motor cortex plasticity during constraint-induced movement therapy in stroke patients. Neurosci Lett 1998; 250: 5–8.
95. Liepert J, Uhde I, Gräf S, et al. Motor cortex plasticity during forced-use therapy in stroke patients: a preliminary study. J Neurol 2001; 248: 315–21.
96. Sawaki L, Butler AJ, Leng X, et al. Constraint-induced movement therapy results in increased motor map area in subjects 3 to 9 months after stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2008; 22: 505–13.
97. Schaechter JD, Kraft E, Hilliard TS, et al. Motor recovery and cortical reorganization after constraint-induced movement therapy in stroke patients: a preliminary study. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2002; 16: 326–38.
98. Taub E, Uswatte G, Morris DM, et al. Improved motor recovery after stroke and massive cortical reorganization following constraint-induced movement therapy. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am 2003; 14: S77–91.
99. Gauthier LV, Taub E, Mark VW, et al. Improvement after constraint-induced movement therapy is independent of infarct location in chronic stroke patients. Stroke 2009; 40: 2468–72.
100. Gauthier LV, Taub E, Perkins C, et al. Remodeling the brain: plastic structural brain changes produced by different motor therapies after stroke. Stroke 2008; 39: 1520–25.
101. Potter K, Fulk GD, Salem Y, et al. Outcome measures in neurological physical therapy practice: Part I. Making sound decisions. J Neurol Phys Ther 2011; 35: 57–64.
102.International Classificiation of Functioning, Disability and Health: Introduction. 2001. Available from: http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2001/9241545429.pdf [Accessed November 16, 2011.]
103. Mirbagheri MM, Lilaonitkul T, Rymer WZ. Prediction of natural history of neuromuscular properties after stroke using Fugl-Meyer scores at 1 month. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2011; 25: 458–68.
104. de Jong LD, Hoonhurst MH, Stuive I, et al. Arm motor control as predictor for hypertonia after stroke: a prospective cohort study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2011; 92: 1411–17.
105. Fritz SL, George SZ, Wolf SL, et al. Participant perception of recovery as criterion to establish importance of improvement for constraint-induced movement therapy outcome measures: a preliminary study. Phys Ther 2007; 87: 170–8.
106. Lo AC, Guarino PD, Krebs HI, et al. Multicenter randomized trial of robot-assisted rehabilitation for chronic stroke: methods and entry characteristics for VA ROBOTICS. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2009; 23: 775–83.
107. Lo AC, Guarino PD, Richards LG, et al. Robot-assisted therapy for long-term upper-limb impairment after stroke. N Engl J Med 2010; 362: 1772–83.
108. Laver KE, George S, Thomas S, et al. Virtual reality for stroke rehabilitation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011; 9: CD008349.
109. Conroy SS, Whitall J, Dipietro L, et al. Effect of gravity on robot-assisted motor training after chronic stroke: a randomized trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2011; 92: 1754–61.
110. Chen Y, Duff M, Lehrer N, et al. A novel adaptive mixed reality system for stroke rehabilitation: principles, proof of concept, and preliminary application in 2 patients. Top Stroke Rehabil 2011; 18: 212–30.
111. Lehrer N, Attygalle S, Wolf SL, et al. Exploring the bases for a mixed reality stroke rehabilitation system, part 1: a unified approach for representing action, quantitative evaluation, and interactive feedback. J Neuroeng Rehabil 2011; 8: 51.