Robot-based hand motor therapy after stroke

Brain

Volumn 131, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 425-437

  Takahashi, Craig D ^a,b   Der Yeghiaian, Lucy ^a   Le, Vu ^a   Motiwala, Rehan R ^a   Cramer, Steven C ^a,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b Santa Ana College   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Functional MRI; Generalization; Motor therapy; Stroke

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ACTION RESEARCH; ADULT; AGED; ARM WEAKNESS; ARTICLE; ATTENTION; BEHAVIOR; BODY POSTURE; CEREBROVASCULAR ACCIDENT; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; ELECTROMYOGRAPHY; FEMALE; FORCE; FUNCTIONAL MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; HUMAN; MALE; MOTOR PERFORMANCE; PHYSIOTHERAPY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; ROBOTICS; SCORING SYSTEM; SENSORIMOTOR CORTEX; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; STROKE; TASK PERFORMANCE; VELOCITY; VIRTUAL REALITY;

EID: 38849191141     PISSN: 00068950     EISSN: 14602156     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/brain/awm311     Document Type: Article

References (110)

1. Aisen ML, Krebs HI, Hogan N, McDowell F, Volpe BT. The effect of robot-assisted therapy and rehabilitative training on motor recovery following stroke. Arch Neurol 1997; 54: 443-6.
2. Alexander MP, Baker E, Naeser MA, Kaplan E, Palumbo C. Neuropsychological and neuroanatomical dimensions of ideomotor apraxia. Brain 1992; 115 (Pt 1): 87-107.
3. Baron J, Cohen L, Cramer S, Dobkin B, Johansen-Berg H, Loubinoux I, et al. Neuroimaging in stroke recovery: a position paper from the First International Workshop on Neuroimaging and Stroke Recovery. Cerebrovasc Dis 2004; 18: 260-7.
4. Brett M, Anton J-L, Valabregue R, Poline J-B. Region of interest analysis using an SPM toolbox. In: 8th International Conference on Functional Mapping of the Human Brain. Japan: Sendai; 2002.
5. Brodal A. Descending supraspinal pathways. Neurological anatomy in relation to clinical medicine. New York: Oxford University Press; 1981. p. 180-293.
6. Brooks V, Stoney S. Motor mechanisms: the role of the pyramidal system in motor control. Ann Rev Physiol 1971; 33: 337-92.
7. Brott T, Adams HP Jr, Olinger CP, Marler JR, Barsan WG, Biller J, et al. Measurements of acute cerebral infarction: a clinical examination scale. Stroke 1989; 20: 864-70.
8. Burgar CG, Lum PS, Shor PC, Machiel Van der Loos HF. Development of robots for rehabilitation therapy: the Palo Alto VA/Stanford experience. J Rehabil Res Dev 2000; 37: 663-73.
9. Burke WJ, Roccaforte WH, Wengel SP. The short form of the Geriatric Depression Scale: a comparison with the 30-item form. J Geriatr Psychiatry Neurol 1991; 4: 173-8.
10. Butefisch C, Hummelsheim H, Denzler P, Mauritz KH. Repetitive training of isolated movements improves the outcome of motor rehabilitation of the centrally paretic hand. J Neurol Sci 1995; 130: 59-68.
11. Carey J, Kimberley T, Lewis S, Auerbach E, Dorsey L, Rundquist P, et al. Analysis of fMRI and finger tracking training in subjects with chronic stroke. Brain 2002a; 125: 773-88.
12. Carey JR, Kimberley TJ, Lewis SM, Auerbach EJ, Dorsey L, Rundquist P, et al. Analysis of fMRI and finger tracking training in subjects with chronic stroke. Brain 2002b; 125: 773-88.
13. Charles SK, Krebs HI, Volpe BT, Lynch D, Hogan N. Wrist rehabilitation following stroke: initial clinical results. In: IEEE Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics. Chicago, IL, Madison (WI): Omnipress; 2005. p. 13-6.
14. Cirstea MC, Levin MF. Improvement of arm movement patterns and endpoint control depends on type of feedback during practice in stroke survivors. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2007; 21: 398-411.
15. Connolly K. The psychobiology of the hand. London: MacKeith Press; 1999.
16. Cramer S, Nelles G, Benson R, Kaplan J, Parker R, Kwong K, et al. A functional MRI study of subjects recovered from hemiparetic stroke. Stroke 1997; 28: 2518-27.
17. Cramer SC, Parrish TB, Levy RM, Stebbins GT, Ruland SD, Lowry DW, et al. Predicting functional gains in a stroke trial. Stroke 2007; 38: 2108-14.
18. Dobkin BH. Strategies for stroke rehabilitation. Lancet Neurol 2004; 3: 528-36.
19. Dromerick AW, Lum PS, Hidler J. Activity-based therapies. NeuroRx 2006; 3: 428-38.
20. Duncan PW, Wallace D, Lai SM, Johnson D, Embretson S, Laster LJ. The stroke impact scale version 2.0. Evaluation of reliability, validity, and sensitivity to change. Stroke 1999; 30: 2131-40.
21. Fasoli SE, Krebs HI, Hogan N. Robotic technology and stroke rehabilitation: translating research into practice. Top Stroke Rehabil 2004; 11: 11-9.
22. Fasoli SE, Krebs HI, Stein J, Frontera WR, Hogan N, Jang SH, et al. Effects of robotic therapy on motor impairment and recovery in chronic stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2003; 84: 477-82.
23. Ferraro M, Palazzolo JJ, Krol J, Krebs HI, Hogan N, Volpe BT. Robot-aided sensorimotor arm training improves outcome in patients with chronic stroke. Neurology 2003; 61: 1604-7.
24. Feys H, De Weerdt W, Nuyens G, van de Winckel A, Selz B, Kiekens C. Predicting motor recovery of the upper limb after stroke rehabilitation: value of a clinical examination. Physiother Res Int 2000; 5: 1-18.
25. Fischer HC, Stubblefield K, Kline T, Luo X, Kenyon RV, Kamper DG. Hand rehabilitation following stroke: a pilot study of assisted finger extension training in a virtual environment. Top Stroke Rehabil 2007; 14: 1-12.
26. Floyer-Lea A, Matthews PM. Distinguishable brain activation networks for short- and long-term motor skill learning. J Neurophysiol 2005; 94: 512-8.
27. Fugl-Meyer AR, Jaasko L, Leyman I, Olsson S, Steglind S. The post-stroke hemiplegic patient. 1. a method for evaluation of physical performance. Scand J Rehabil Med 1975; 7: 13-31.
28. Gresham G, Duncan P, Stason W, Adams H, Adelman A, Alexander D, et al. Post-Stroke Rehabilitation. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Public Health Service, Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, 1995.
29. Hesse S, Schmidt H, Werner C, Bardeleben A. Upper and lower extremity robotic devices for rehabilitation and for studying motor control. Curr Opin Neurol 2003a; 16: 705-10.
30. Hesse S, Schulte-Tigges G, Konrad M, Bardeleben A, Werner C. Robot-assisted arm trainer for the passive and active practice of bilateral forearm and wrist movements in hemiparetic subjects. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2003b; 84: 915-20.
31. Hesse S, Werner C, Pohl M, Rueckriem S, Mehrholz J, Lingnau ML. Computerized arm training improves the motor control of the severely affected arm after stroke: a single-blinded randomized trial in two centers. Stroke 2005; 36: 1960-6.
32. Hodics T, Cohen LG, Cramer SC. Functional imaging of intervention effects in stroke motor rehabilitation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2006; 87: 36-42.
33. Holden MK, Dettwiler A, Dyar T, Niemann G, Bizzi E. Retraining movement in patients with acquired brain injury using a virtual environment. Stud Health Technol Inform 2001; 81: 192-8.
34. Hsieh CL, Nelson DL, Smith DA, Peterson CQ. A comparison of performance in added-purpose occupations and rote exercise for dynamic standing balance in persons with hemiplegia. Am J Occup Ther 1996; 50: 10-6.
35. Humphrey D, Schmidt E, Thompson W. Predicting measures of motor performance from multiple cortical spike trains. Science 1970; 170: 758-62.
36. Huxlin KR, Pasternak T. Training-induced recovery of visual motion perception after extrastriate cortical damage in the adult cat. Cereb Cortex 2004; 14: 81-90.
37. Jack D, Boian R, Merians AS, Tremaine M, Burdea GC, Adamovich SV, et al. Virtual reality-enhanced stroke rehabilitation. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 2001; 9: 308-18.
38. Jones E. Connectivity of the primate sensory-motor cortex. In: Peters A, Jones E, editors. Cerebral cortex. New York: Plenum Press; 1986. p. 113-84.
39. Kaelin-Lang A, Luft A, Sawaki L, Burstein A, Sohn Y, Cohen L. Modulation of human corticomotor excitability by somatosensory input. J Physiol 2002; 540: 623-33.
40. Kahn LE, Lum PS, Rymer WZ, Reinkensmeyer DJ. Robot-assisted movement training for the stroke-impaired arm: does it matter what the robot does? J Rehabil Res Dev 2006a; 43: 619-30.
41. Kahn LE, Zygman ML, Rymer WZ, Reinkensmeyer DJ. Robot-assisted reaching exercise promotes arm movement recovery in chronic hemiparetic stroke: a randomized controlled pilot study. J Neuroengineering Rehabil 2006b; 3: 12.
42. Karni A, Meyer G, Jezzard P, Adams M, Turner R, Ungerleider L. Functional MRI evidence for adult motor cortex plasticity during motor skill learning. Nature 1996; 377: 155-8.
43. Katz RT, Rovai GP, Brait C, Rymer WZ. Objective quantification of spastic hypertonia: correlation with clinical findings. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1992; 73: 339-47.
44. Kempermann G, Kuhn HG, Gage FH. More hippocampal neurons in adult mice living in an enriched environment. Nature 1997; 386: 493-5.
45. Khanicheh A, Triantafyllou C, Weinberg B, Astrakas L, Tzika A, Mavroidis C. MR compatible ERF driven hand rehabilitation device. In: IEEE Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics. Chicago, IL, Madison (WI): Omnipress; 2005. p. 7-12.
46. Kline T, Kamper DG, Schmit BD. Control system for pneumatically controlled glove to assist in grasp activities. In: IEEE Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics. Chicago, IL, Madison (WI): Omnipress; 2005. p. 78-81.
47. Kolb B, Gibb R. Environmental enrichment and cortical injury: behavioral and anatomical consequences of frontal cortex lesions. Cereb Cortex 1991; 1: 189-98.
48. Krakauer JW. Motor learning: its relevance to stroke recovery and neurorehabilitation. Curr Opin Neurol 2006; 19: 84-90.
49. Krebs HI, Hogan N, Volpe BT, Aisen ML, Edelstein L, Diels C. Overview of clinical trials with MIT-MANUS: a robot-aided neuro-rehabilitation facility. Technol Health Care 1999; 7: 419-23.
50. Krebs HI, Volpe BT, Ferraro M, Fasoli S, Palazzolo J, Rohrer B, et al. Robot-aided neurorehabilitation: from evidence-based to science-based rehabilitation. Top Stroke Rehabil 2002; 8: 54-70.
51. Ku J, Mraz R, Baker N, Zakzanis KK, Lee JH, Kim IY, et al. A data glove with tactile feedback for FMRI of virtual reality experiments. Cyberpsychol Behav 2003; 6: 497-508.
52. Kurillo G, Mihelj M, Munih M, Bajd T. Grasping and manipulation in virtual environment using 3By6 finger device. In: IEEE Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics. Chicago, IL, Madison (WI): Omnipress; 2005. p. 131-4.
53. Lai JC, Woo J, Hui E, Chan WM. Telerehabilitation - a new model for community-based stroke rehabilitation. J Telemed Telecare 2004; 10: 199-205.
54. Langhorne P, Williams BO, Gilchrist W, Howie K. Do stroke units save lives? Lancet 1993; 342: 395-8.
55. Lewis GN, Byblow WD. The effects of repetitive proprioceptive stimulation on corticomotor representation in intact and hemiplegic individuals. Clin Neurophysiol 2004; 115: 765-73.
56. Lin JH, Hsieh CL, Lo SK, Hsiao SF, Huang MH. Prediction of functional outcomes in stroke inpatients receiving rehabilitation. J Formos Med Assoc 2003; 102: 695-700.
57. Lincoln N, Jackson J, Adams S. Reliability and revision of the Nottingham Sensory Assessment for stroke patients. Physiotherapy 1998a; 84: 358-65.
58. Lincoln NB, Jackson JM, Adams SA. Reliability and revision of the Nottingham sensory assessment for stroke patients. Physiotherapy 1998b; 84: 358-65.
59. Lotze M, Braun C, Birbaumer N, Anders S, Cohen L. Motor learning elicited by voluntary drive. Brain 2003; 126: 866-72.
60. Luft A, McCombe-Waller S, Whitall J, Forrester L, Macko R, Sorkin J, et al. Repetitive bilateral arm training and motor cortex activation in chronic stroke: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2004; 292: 1853-61.
61. Lum PS, Burgar CG, Shor PC, Majmundar M, Van der Loos M. 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: 952-9.
62. Lum PS, Uswatte G, Taub E, Hardin P, Mark VW. A telerehabilitation approach to delivery of constraint-induced movement therapy. J Rehabil Res Dev 2006; 43: 391-400.
63. Luo X, Kenyon RV, Kline T, Waldinger HC, Kamper DG. An augmented reality training environment for post-stroke finger extension rehabilitation. In: IEEE Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics. Chicago, IL, Madison (WI): Omnipress; 2005. p. 329-32.
64. Lyle RC. A performance test for assessment of upper limb function in physical rehabilitation treatment and research. Int J Rehabil Res 1981; 4: 483-92.
65. Mathiowetz V, Volland G, Kashman N, Weber K. Adult norms for the Box and Block Test of manual dexterity. Am J Occup Ther 1985; 39: 386-91.
66. Merians AS, Poizner H, Boian R, Burdea G, Adamovich S. Sensorimotor training in a virtual reality environment: does it improve functional recovery poststroke? Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2006; 20: 252-67.
67. Miles F, Evarts E. Concepts of motor organization. Ann Rev Psychol 1979; 30: 327-62.
68. Mountcastle V. The sensory hand: neural mechanisms of somatic sensation. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press; 2005.
69. Muellbacher W, Ziemann U, Boroojerdi B, Cohen L, Hallett M. Role of the human motor cortex in rapid motor learning. Exp Brain Res 2001; 136: 431-8.
70. Mulas M, Folgheraiter M, Gini G. An EMG-controlled exoskeleton for hand rehabilitation. In: IEEE Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics. Chicago, IL, Madison (WI): Omnipress; 2005. p. 371-4.
71. Nudo R, Milliken G, Jenkins W, Merzenich M. Use-dependent alterations of movement representations in primary motor cortex of adult squirrel monkeys. J Neurosci 1996; 16: 785-807.
72. Nudo RJ. Postinfarct cortical plasticity and behavioral recovery. Stroke 2007; 38: 840-5.
73. Oldfield R. The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh Inventory. Neuropsychologia 1971; 9: 97-113.
74. Ottenbacher KJ, Jannell S. The results of clinical trials in stroke rehabilitation research. Arch Neurol 1993; 50: 37-44.
75. Oxford Grice K, Vogel KA, Le V, Mitchell A, Muniz S, Vollmer MA. Adult norms for a commercially available Nine Hole Peg Test for finger dexterity. Am J Occup Ther 2003; 57: 570-3.
76. Page SJ. Intensity versus task-specificity after stroke: how important is intensity? Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2003; 82: 730-2.
77. Pariente J, Loubinoux I, Carel C, Albucher J, Leger A, Manelfe C, et al. Fluoxetine modulates motor performance and cerebral activation of patients recovering from stroke. Ann Neurol 2001; 50: 718-29.
78. Pascual-Leone A, Nguyet D, Cohen L, Brasil-Neto J, Cammarota A, Hallett M. Modulation of muscle responses evoked by transcranial magnetic stimulation during the acquisition of new fine motor skills. J Neurophysiol 1995; 74: 1037-45.
79. Patton JL, Mussa-Ivaldi FA. Robot-assisted adaptive training: custom force fields for teaching movement patterns. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2004; 51: 636-46.
80. Perez MA, Lungholt BK, Nyborg K, Nielsen JB. Motor skill training induces changes in the excitability of the leg cortical area in healthy humans. Exp Brain Res 2004; 159: 197-205.
81. Poon CS. Sensorimotor learning and information processing by Bayesian internal models. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2004; 6: 4481-2.
82. Porter R, Lemon R. Corticospinal function & voluntary movement. Oxford: Clarendon Press; 1993.
83. Prange GB, Jannink MJ, Groothuis-Oudshoorn CG, Hermens HJ, Ijzerman MJ. Systematic review of the effect of robot-aided therapy on recovery of the hemiparetic arm after stroke. J Rehabil Res Dev 2006; 43: 171-84.
84. Rathore S, Hinn A, Cooper L, Tyroler H, Rosamond W. Characterization of incident stroke signs and symptoms: findings from the atherosclerosis risk in communities study. Stroke 2002; 33: 2718-21.
85. Reinkensmeyer D, Emken J, Cramer S. Robotics, motor learning, and neurologic recovery. Annu Rev Biomed Eng 2004; 6: 497-525.
86. Reinkensmeyer DJ, Kahn LE, Averbuch M, McKenna-Cole A, Schmit BD, Rymer WZ. Understanding and treating arm movement impairment after chronic brain injury: progress with the ARM guide. J Rehabil Res Dev 2000; 37: 653-62.
87. Reinkensmeyer DJ, Pang CT, Nessler JA, Painter CC. Web-based telerehabilitation for the upper extremity after stroke. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 2002; 10: 102-8.
88. Ridding MC, Brouwer B, Miles TS, Pitcher JB, Thompson PD. Changes in muscle responses to stimulation of the motor cortex induced by peripheral nerve stimulation in human subjects. Exp Brain Res 2000; 131: 135-43.
89. Rossini P, Dal Forno G. Integrated technology for evaluation of brain function and neural plasticity. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am 2004; 15: 263-306.
90. Shelton FD, Volpe BT, Reding M. Motor impairment as a predictor of functional recovery and guide to rehabilitation treatment after stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2001; 15: 229-37.
91. Stinear CM, Barber PA, Smale PR, Coxon JP, Fleming MK, Byblow WD. Functional potential in chronic stroke patients depends on corticospinal tract integrity. Brain 2007; 130: 170-80.
92. Stokes TF, Baer DM. An implicit technology of generalization. J Appl Behav Anal 1977; 10: 349-67.
93. Takahashi C, Der-Yeghiaian L, Le V, Cramer SC. A robotic device for hand motor therapy after stroke. In: Proceedings of IEEE 9th International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics: Frontiers of the Human-Machine Interface. Chicago, Illinois; 2005. p. 17-20.
94. Takahashi CD, Reinkensmeyer DJ. Hemiparetic stroke impairs anticipatory control of arm movement. Exp Brain Res 2003; 149: 131-40.
95. Taub E, Miller NE, Novack TA, Cook EW 3rd, Fleming WC, Nepomuceno CS, et al. Technique to improve chronic motor deficit after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1993; 74: 347-54.
96. Van Peppen RP, Kortsmit M, Lindeman E, Kwakkel G. Effects of visual feedback therapy on postural control in bilateral standing after stroke: a systematic review. J Rehabil Med 2006; 38: 3-9.
97. van Praag H, Kempermann G, Gage FH. Neural consequences of environmental enrichment. Nat Rev Neurosci 2000; 1: 191-8.
98. Vogt BA, Pandya DN. Cortico-cortical connections of somatic sensory cortex (areas 3, 1 and 2) in the rhesus monkey. J Comp Neurol 1978; 177: 179-91.
99. Volpe BT, Ferraro M, Lynch D, Christos P, Krol J, Trudell C, et al. Robotics and other devices in the treatment of patients recovering from stroke. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep 2005; 5: 465-70.
100. Volpe BT, Krebs HI, Hogan N, Edelsteinn L, Diels CM, Aisen ML. Robot training enhanced motor outcome in patients with stroke maintained over 3 years. Neurology 1999; 53: 1874-6.
101. Waldvogel D, van Gelderen P, Ishii K, Hallett M. The effect of movement amplitude on activation in functional magnetic resonance imaging studies. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 1999; 19: 1209-12.
102. Walker-Batson D, Smith P, Curtis S, Unwin DH. Neuromodulation paired with learning dependent practice to enhance post stroke recovery? Restor Neurol Neurosci 2004; 22: 387-92.
103. Will BE, Rosenzweig MR, Bennett EL, Hebert M, Morimoto H. Relatively brief environmental enrichment aids recovery of learning capacity and alters brain measures after postweaning brain lesions in rats. J Comp Physiol Psychol 1977; 91: 33-50.
104. Wilson F. The hand: how its use shapes the brain, language, and human culture. New York: Pantheon; 1998.
105. Wing A, Haggard P, Flanagan J. Hand and brain: the neurophysiology and psychology of hand movements. New York: Academic Press; 1998.
106. Winters JM. A telehomecare model for optimizing rehabilitation outcomes. Telemed J E Health 2004; 10: 200-12.
107. Wolf SL, Winstein CJ, Miller JP, Taub E, Uswatte G, Morris D, 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.
108. Wu C, Trombly CA, Lin K, Tickle-Degnen L. Effects of object affordances on reaching performance in persons with and without cerebrovascular accident. Am J Occup Ther 1998; 52: 447-56.
109. Wu C, Trombly CA, Lin K, Tickle-Degnen L. A kinematic study of contextual effects on reaching performance in persons with and without stroke: influences of object availability. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2000; 81: 95-101.
110. You SH, Jang SH, Kim YH, Hallett M, Ahn SH, Kwon YH, et al. Virtual reality-induced cortical reorganization and associated locomotor recovery in chronic stroke: an experimenter-blind randomized study. Stroke 2005; 36: 1166-71.