Combined use of repetitive task practice and an assistive robotic device in a patient with subacute stroke

Physical Therapy

Volumn 86, Issue 10, 2006, Pages 1378-1386

  Frick, Ellen M ^a   Alberts, Jay L ^b,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b LERNER RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^c LOUIS STOKES CLEVELAND VA MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Forced use; Rehabilitation; Robotic therapy; Stroke; Upper extremity

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARM EXERCISE; ARTICLE; CASE REPORT; FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT; HAND FUNCTION; HAND GRIP; HEMIPLEGIA; HUMAN; MALE; ROBOTICS; STROKE; TASK PERFORMANCE; TRAINING; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

CEREBROVASCULAR ACCIDENT; ELECTROMYOGRAPHY; EXERCISE MOVEMENT TECHNIQUES; HAND STRENGTH; HEMIPLEGIA; HUMANS; MALE; MAN-MACHINE SYSTEMS; MIDDLE AGED; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; ROBOTICS; SELF-HELP DEVICES; UPPER EXTREMITY;

EID: 33749352373     PISSN: 00319023     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2522/ptj.20050149     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics: 2005 Update. Dallas, Tex: American Heart Association; 2005.
2. Byl N, Roderick J, Mohamed O, et al. Effectiveness of sensory and motor rehabilitation of the upper limb following the principles of neuroplasticity: patients stable poststroke. Neurorehabil Neuro Repair. 2003;17:176-191.
3. Miltner WH, Bauder H, Sommer M, et al. Effects of constraint-induced movement therapy on patients with chronic motor deficits after stroke: a replication. Stroke. 1999;30:586-592.
4. Wolf SL, Lecraw D, Barton L, Jann B. Forced use of the hemiplegic upper extremities to reverse the effect of learned nonuse among chronic stroke and head-injured patients. Exp Neurol. 1989;104: 125-132.
5. Taub E, Miller N, Novack T, et al. Technique to improve chronic motor deficit after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1993;74:347-354.
6. Miltner WHR, Bauder H, Sommer M, et al. Effects of constraint-induced movement therapy on patients with chronic motor deficits after stroke. Stroke. 1999;30:586-592.
7. Page SJ, Sisto S, Johnston MV, et al. Modified constraint-induced therapy in subacute stroke: a case report. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2002;83:286-290.
8. Wolf SL, Blanton S, Baer H, et al. Repetitive task practice: a critical review of constraint-induced movement therapy in stroke. Neurologist. 2002;8:325-338.
9. Park SW, Butler AJ, Cavalheiro V, et al. Changes in serial optical topography and TMS during task performance after constraint-induced movement therapy in stroke: a case study. Neurorehabil Neuro Repair. 2004;18:95-104.
10. Liepert J, Uhde I, Graf S, et al. Motor cortex plasticity during forced-use therapy in stroke patients: a preliminary study. J Neurol. 2001;248:315-321.
11. Mark VW, Taub E. Constraint-induced movement therapy for chronic stroke hemiparesis and other disabilities. Restor Neurol Neurosci. 2002;22:317-336.
12. Sterr A, Freivogel S. Motor improvement following intensive training in low-functioning chronic hemiparesis. Neurology. 2003;61: 842-844.
13. Page SJ, Levine P, Sisto S, et al. Stroke patients' and therapists' opinions of constraint-induced movement therapy. Clin Rehabil. 2002; 16:55-60.
14. Fasoli SE, Drebs HI, Stein J, et al. Robotic therapy for chronic motor impairments after stroke: follow-up results. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004;85:1106-1111.
15. Lum PS, Burgar CG, Shor PC, et al. Robot-assisted movement training compared with conventional therapy techniques for the rehabilitation of upper-limb motor function after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2002;83:952-959.
16. Reinkensmeyer DJ, Emken JL, Cramer SC. Robotics, motor learning, and neurologic recovery. Ann Rev Biomed Eng. 2004;6:16.11-16.29.
17. Winstein CJ, Miller JP, Blanton S, et al. Methods for a multisite randomized trial to investigate the effect of constraint-induced movement therapy in upper extremity function among adults recovering from a cerebrovascular stroke. Neurorehabil Neuro Repair. 2003;17: 137-152.
18. Morris D, Uswatte G, Crago J, et al. The reliability of the Wolf Motor Function Test for assessing upper extremity function after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2001;82:750-755.
19. Murphy MA, Roberts-Warrior D. A review of motor performance measures and treatment interventions for patients with stroke. Topics in Geriatric Rehabilitation. 2003;19(1):3-42.
20. Fugl-Meyer A, Jaasko L, Leyman I, et al. The post stroke hemiplegic patient: a method for evaluation of physical performance. Scand J Rehabil Med. 1975;7:13-31.
21. Alberts JL, Butler AJ, Wolf SL. The effects of constraint-induced therapy on precision grip: a preliminary study. Neurorehabil Neuro Repair. 2004;18:250-258.
22. Duncan PW, Propst M, Nelson SG. Reliability of the Fugl-Meyer assessment of sensorimotor recovery following cerebrovascular accident. Phys Ther. 1983;63:1606-1610.
23. Di Fabio RP, Badke RB. Relationship of sensory organization to balance function in patients with hemiplegia. Phys Ther. 1990;70: 542-548.
24. Duncan PW, Wallace D, Lai SM, et al. The Stroke Impact Scale version 2.0: evaluation of reliability, validity, and sensitivity to change. Stroke. 1999;30:2131-2140.
25. Schleenbaker RE, Mainous AG III. Electromyographic biofeedback for neuromuscular reeducation in the hemiplegic stroke patient: a meta-analysis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1993;74:1301-1304. Comment in 1994;75:1023.
26. Wolf SL, Baker M, Kelly J. EMG biofeedback in stroke: effect of patient characteristics. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1979;60:96-102.
27. Wolf SL, Binder-Macleod S. Electromyographic biofeedback applications to the hemiplegic patient: changes in upper extremity neuromuscular and functional status. Phys Ther. 1983;63:1393-1403.
28. Selles R, Li X, Lin F, et al. Feedback-controlled and programmed stretching of the ankle plantarflexors and dorsiflexors in stroke: effects of a 4-week intervention program. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;86: 2330-2336.
29. van der Lee JH, Wagenaar RC, Lankhorst GJ, et al. Forced use of the upper extremity in chronic stroke patients. Stroke. 1999;30:2369-2375.
30. Taub E. Somatosensory deafferentation research with monkeys: implications for rehabilitation medicine. In: Ince LP, ed. Behavioral Psychology in Rehabilitation Medicine: Clinical Applications. Baltimore, Md: Williams & Wilkins; 1980:371.
31. Boissy P, Bourbonnais D, Carlotti MM, et al. Maximal grip force in chronic stroke subjects and its relationship to global upper extremity function. Clin Rehabil. 1999;13:354-362.
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;50:714-719.
33. Mercier C, Bourbonnais D. Relative shoulder flexion and handgrip strength is related to upper limb function after stroke. Clin Rehabil. 2004;18:215-221.
34. Sunderland A, Tinson D, Bradley L, Hewer RL. Arm function after stroke: an evaluation of grip strength as a measure of recovery and a prognostic indicator. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1989;52:1267-1272.
35. Canning CG, Ada L, Adams R, O'Dwyer NJ. Loss of strength contributes more to physical disability after stroke than loss of dexterity. Clin Rehabil. 2004;18:300-308.