Potential predictors of motor and functional outcomes after distributed constraint-induced therapy for patients with stroke

Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair

Volumn 23, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 336-342

  Lin, Keh Chung ^a   Huang, Yan Hua ^a   Hsieh, Yu Wei ^c   Wu, Ching Yi ^b  

^a NATIONAL TAIWAN UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Taiwan)

^b CHANG GUNG UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

^c CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Constraint induced therapy; Hemiplegia; Outcome prediction; Rehabilitation; Stroke; Upper extremity.

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGE DISTRIBUTION; AGED; ARM MOVEMENT; ARTICLE; CONSTRAINT INDUCED THERAPY; DAILY LIFE ACTIVITY; FEMALE; FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT; FUNCTIONAL INDEPENDENCE MEASURE; HAND MOVEMENT; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MOTOR PERFORMANCE; SPASTICITY; STROKE; STROKE PATIENT; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGE FACTORS; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ARM; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MOVEMENT DISORDERS; MUSCLE SPASTICITY; PARESIS; PATIENT SELECTION; PHYSICAL THERAPY MODALITIES; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PROGNOSIS; RECOVERY OF FUNCTION; RESTRAINT, PHYSICAL; STROKE; TREATMENT OUTCOME; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 64149086307     PISSN: 15459683     EISSN: 15526844     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1545968308321773     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Carr J., Shephard R. Neurological Rehabilitation: Optimizing Motor Performance. London: Butterworth-Heineman ; 1998.
2. Plummer, AC Constraint-induced therapy and the motor learning literature that underpins its application. Phys Ther Rev. 2003 ; 8: 143-149.
3. Sunderland A., Tuke A. Neuroplasticity, learning and recovery after stroke: a critical evaluation of constraint-induced therapy. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2005 ; 15: 81-96.
4. Page SJ, Levine P., Sisto S., Bond Q., Johnston MV Stroke patients' and therapists' opinions of constraint-induced movement therapy. Clin Rehabil. 2002 ; 16: 55-60.
5. Dromerick AW, Edwards DF, Hahn M. Does the application of constraint-induced movement therapy during acute rehabilitation reduce arm impairment after ischemic stroke ? Stroke. 2000 ; 31: 2984-2988.
6. Wu CY, Lin KC, Chen HC, Chen IH, Hong WH Effects of modified constraint-induced movement therapy on movement kinematics and daily function in patients with stroke: a kinematic study of motor control mechanisms. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2007 ; 21: 460-466.
7. Wolf SL, Winstein CJ, Miller J., Blanton S., Clark P., Nichols-Larsen D. Looking in the rear mirror: the EXCITE trial revisited. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2007 ; 21: 379-387.
8. Dettmers C., Teske U., Hamzei F., Uswatte G., Taub E., Weiller C. Distributed form of constraint-induced movement therapy improves functional outcome and quality of life after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005 ; 86: 204-209.
9. Lin KC, Wu CY, Wei TH, Lee CY, Liu JS Effects of modified constraint-induced movement therapy on reach-to-grasp movements and functional performance after chronic stroke: a randomized controlled study. Clin Rehabil. 2007 ; 21: 1075-1086.
10. Wu CY, Chen CL, Tsai WC, Lin KC, Chou SH A randomized, controlled trial of mCIT for elderly stroke survivors: changes in motor impairment, daily functioning, and quality of life. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2007 ; 88: 273-278.
11. Boake C., Noser EA, Ro T., et al. Constraint-induced movement therapy during early stroke rehabilitation. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2007 ; 21: 14-24.
12. Bonifer NM, Anderson KM, Arciniegas DB Constraint-induced movement therapy after stroke: efficacy for patients with minimal upper-extremity motor ability. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005 ; 86: 1867-1873.
13. Page SJ, Sisto SA, Levin P., Leonard AC Modified constraint-induced therapy in acute stroke: a randomized controlled pilot study. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2005 ; 19: 27-32.
14. Wolf SL, Winstein CJ, Miller JP, et al. Effects of constraint-induced movement therapy on upper extremity function 3 to 9 months after stroke. JAMA. 2006 ; 296: 2095-2104.
15. Fritz SL, Light KE, Clifford SN, Patterson TS, Behrman AL, Davis SB Descriptive characteristics as potential predictors of outcomes following constrain-induced movement therapy for people after stroke. Phys Ther. 2006 ; 86: 825-835.
16. Fritz SL, Light KE, Patterson TS, Behrman AL, Davis SB Active finger extension predicts outcomes after constraint-induced movement therapy for individuals with hemiparesis after stroke. Stroke. 2005 ; 36: 1172-1177.
17. Rijntjes M., Hobbeling V., Hamzei F., et al. Individual factors in constraint-induced movement therapy after stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2005 ; 19: 238-239.
18. Langan J., van Donkelaar P. The influence of hand dominance on the response to a constraint-induced therapy program following stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2008 ; 22: 298-304.
19. Ploughman MP, Corbett D. Can forced-used therapy be clinically applied after stroke? An exploratory randomized controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004 ; 85: 1417-1423.
20. Dobkin BH Confounders in rehabilitation trials of task-oriented training: lessons from the designs of he EXCITE and SCILT multicenter trials. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2007 ; 21: 3-13.
21. Cargano JW, Reeves MJ Sex differences in stroke recovery and stroke-specific quality of life: results from a statewide stroke registry. Stroke. 2007 ; 38: 2541-2548.
22. Wittenberg G., Bastings E., Fowlkes A., Morgan T., Good D., Pons T. Dynamic course of intracortical TMS paired-pulse responses during recovery of motor function after stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2007 ; 21: 568-573.
23. 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.
24. Wolf SL, Thompson P., Morris DM, et al. The EXCITE trial: Attributes of the Wolf Motor Function Test in patients with subacute stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2005 ; 19: 194-205.
25. Brunnstrom S. Movement Therapy in Hemiplegia. New York, NY: Harper & Row ; 1970.
26. Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR " Mini-mental State." A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res. 1975 ; 12: 189-198.
27. Bohannon R., Smith M. Interrater reliability of a modified Ashworth scale of muscle spasticity. Phys Ther. 1987 ; 67: 206-207.
28. 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.
29. Masiero S., Celi A., Rosati G., Armani M. Robotic-assisted rehabilitation of the upper limb after acute stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2007 ; 88: 142-149.
30. Duncan PW, Propst M., Nelson SG Reliability of the Fugl-Meyer assessment of sensorimotor recovery following cerebrovascular accident. Phys Ther. 1983 ; 63: 1606-1610.
31. DiFabio RP, Badke RB Relationship of sensory organization to balance function in patients with hemiplegia. Phys Ther. 1990 ; 70: 542-548.
32. van der Lee JH, Beckerman H., Knol DL, de Vet HCW, Bouter LM Clinimetric properties of the motor activity log for the assessment of arm use in hemiparetic patients. Stroke. 2004 ; 35: 1410-1414.
33. Uswatte G., Taub E., Morris D., Light K., Thompson PA The motor activity log-28: assessing daily use of the hemiparetic arm after stroke. Neurology. 2006 ; 67: 1189-1194.
34. Uswatte G., Taub E., Morris D., Vignolo M., McCulloch K. Reliability and validity of the upper-extremity motor activity log-14 for measuring real-world arm use. Stroke. 2005 ; 36: 2493-2496.
35. Hamilton BB, Granger CV, Sherwin FS, Zielezny M., Tashman JS A uniform national data system for medical rehabilitation. In: Fuhrer MJ, ed. Rehabilitation outcomes: analysis and measurements. Baltimore, MD: Brookes; 1987: 137-147.
36. Chau N., Daler S., Andre JM, Patris A. Inter-rater agreement of two functional independence scales: the Functional Independence Measure (FIM) and a subjective uniform continuous scale. Disabil Rehabil. 1994 ; 16: 63-71.
37. Hamilton B., Laughlin JA, Fiedler RC, Granger CV Interrater reliability of the 7-level Functional Independence Measure (FIM). Scand J Rehabil Med. 1994 ; 26: 115-119.
38. Dodds TA, Martin DP, Stolov WC, Deyo RA A validation of the Functional Independence Measurement and its performance among rehabilitation inpatients. Arch Phys Med Rehab. 1993 ; 74: 531-536.
39. Kidd D., Stewart G., Baldry J., et al. The Functional Independence Measure: a comparative validity and reliability study. Disabil Rehabil. 1995 ; 17: 10-14.
40. Gosman-Hedstrom G., Svensson E. Parallel reliability of the Functional Independence Measure and the Barthel ADL index. Disabil Rehabil. 2000 ; 22: 702-715.
41. Wolf SL Revisiting constraint-induced movement therapy: are we too smitten with the mitten? Is all nonuse "learned"? and other quandaries. Phys Ther. 2007 ; 87: 1212-1223.
42. Studenski S., Duncan PW, Perera S., Reker D., Lai SM, Richards L. Daily functioning and quality of life in a randomized controlled trial of therapeutic exercise for subacute stroke survivors. Stroke. 2005 ; 36: 1764-1770.
43. Ergeletzis D., Kevorkian CG, Rintala D. Rehabilitation of the older stroke patient: functional outcome and comparison with younger patients. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2002 ; 81: 881-889.
44. Shelton Fnap, Volpe BT, Reding M. Motor impairment as a predictor of functional recovery and guide to rehabilitation treatment after stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2001 ; 15: 229-237.
45. Bruno A., Saha C., Williams LS Using change in the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale to measure treatment effect in acute stroke trials. Stroke. 2006 ; 37: 920-921.
46. Kasner S., Chalela J., Luciano J., et al. Reliability and validity of estimating the NIH stroke scale score from medical records. Stroke. 1999 ; 30: 1534-1537.
47. Adams HP Jr, Davis PH, Liera EC, et al. Baseline NIH stroke scale score strongly predicts outcome after stroke: a report of the Trial of Org 10172 in acute stroke treatment (TOAST). Neurology. 1999 ; 53: 126-131.
48. Lyden P., Lu M., Jackson C., et al. Underlying structure of the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale: results of a factor analysis. NINDS tPA Stroke Trial Investigators. Stroke. 1999 ; 30: 2347-2354.
49. Young FB, Weir CJ, Lees KR Comparison of the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale with disability outcome measures in acute stroke trials. Stroke. 2005 ; 36: 2187-2192.
50. Heinemann AW, Roth EJ, Cichowski MS, Betts HB Multivariate analysis of improvement and outcome following stroke rehabilitation. Arch Neurol. 1987 ; 44: 1167-1172.
51. Shah S., Vanclay F., Cooper B. Efficiency, effectiveness and duration of stroke rehabilitation. Stroke. 1990 ; 21: 241-246.
52. Kugler C., Altenhöner T., Lochner P., Ferbert A. Does age influence early recovery from ischemic stroke? A study from the Hessian stroke data bank. J Neurol. 2003 ; 250: 676-681.
53. Marx JD, Cummings K. Physics education research. Am J Phys. 2007 ; 75: 87-91.
54. Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S. Applied Logistic Regression. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons ; 1989.
55. Kleinbaum DG, Kupper LL, Muller KE Applied Regression Analysis and Other Multivariable Methods. 2 nd ed. Boston, MA: PWS-Kent ; 1988.
56. Neter J., Kutner M., Nachtsheim C., Wasserman W. Applied Linear Statistical Models. 4 th ed. Chicago, IL: McGraw-Hill ; 1996.
57. Cho SH, Kim DG, Kim DS, Kim YH, Lee CH, Jang SH Motor outcome according to the integrity of the corticospinal tract determined by diffusion tensor tractography in the early stage of corona radiata infarct. Neurosci Lett. 2007 ; 426: 123-127.
58. Patti F., Failla G., Reggio A., et al. Stroke in the young in Sicily: prevalence and clinical features. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 1998 ; 7: 196-199.
59. Jongbloed L. Prediction of function after stroke: a critical review. Stroke. 1986 ; 17: 765-776.
60. Hofgren C., Bjorkdahl A., Esbjornsson E., Sunnerhagen KS Recovery after stroke: cognition, ADL function and return to work. Acta Neurol Scand. 2007 ; 115: 73-80.