Kinematics of Pointing Movements Made in a Virtual Versus a Physical 3-Dimensional Environment in Healthy and Stroke Subjects

Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

Volumn 90, Issue 5, 2009, Pages 793-802

  Knaut, Luiz A ^a,b   Subramanian, Sandeep K ^b,c   McFadyen, Bradford J ^d,e   Bourbonnais, Daniel ^a,b   Levin, Mindy F ^b,c  

^a UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

^b CENTRE FOR INTERDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH IN REHABILITATION OF GREATER MONTREAL   (Canada)

^c MCGILL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^d UNIVERSITÉ LAVAL   (Canada)

^e CENTER FOR INTERDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH IN REHABILITATION AND SOCIAL INTEGRATION   (Canada)

Author keywords

Rehabilitation; Stroke; Upper extremity; Virtual reality, exercise

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ADULT; AGED; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARM MOVEMENT; ARTICLE; CHEDOKE MCMASTER ARM SCORE; COORDINATION; FEMALE; HEMIPARESIS; HUMAN; KINEMATICS; MALE; MOTION ANALYSIS SYSTEM; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; OBSERVATIONAL STUDY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PERFORMANCE; PHYSICAL ACTIVITY; RANGE OF MOTION; ROTATION; SCORING SYSTEM; STROKE; THREE DIMENSIONAL POINTING MOVEMENT;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BIOMECHANICS; CASE-CONTROL STUDIES; FEMALE; FINGERS; FUNCTIONAL LATERALITY; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MOVEMENT; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; REFERENCE VALUES; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; STROKE; TASK PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS; USER-COMPUTER INTERFACE; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 65249165413     PISSN: 00039993     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2008.10.030     Document Type: Article

References (62)

1. World Health Organization. 2002. http://www.who.int/en/ Accessed January 15, 2009
2. American Heart Association. 2006. http://www.americanheart.org Accessed January 15, 2009
3. Olsen T.S. Arm and leg paresis as outcome predictors in stroke rehabilitation. Stroke 21 (1990) 247-251
4. Carod-Artal J., Egido J.A., Gonzalez J.L., and Varela de Seijas E. Quality of life among stroke survivors evaluated 1 year after stroke: experience of a stroke unit. Stroke 31 (2000) 2995-3000
5. Cirstea M.C., and Levin M.F. Compensatory strategies for reaching in stroke. Brain 123 (2000) 940-953
6. Cirstea M.C., Mitnitski A.B., Feldman A.G., and Levin M.F. Interjoint coordination dynamics during reaching in stroke. Exp Brain Res 151 (2003) 289-300
7. Dewald J.P., Sheshadri V., Dawson M.L., and Beer R.F. Upper-limb discoordination in hemiparetic stroke: implications for neurorehabilitation. Top Stroke Rehabil 8 (2001) 1-12
8. Levin M.F. Interjoint coordination during pointing movements is disrupted in spastic hemiparesis. Brain 119 (1996) 281-293
9. Mercier C., and Bourbonnais D. Relative shoulder flexor and handgrip strength is related to upper limb function after stroke. Clin Rehabil 18 (2004) 215-221
10. Musampa N.K., Mathieu P.A., and Levin M.F. Relationship between stretch reflex thresholds and voluntary arm muscle activation in patients with spasticity. Exp Brain Res 181 (2007) 579-593
11. Winward C.E., Halligan P.W., and Wade D.T. Current practice and clinical relevance of somatosensory assessment after stroke. Clin Rehabil 13 (1999) 48-55
12. Michaelsen S.M., Dannenbaum R., and Levin M.F. Task-specific training with trunk restraint on arm recovery in stroke: randomized control trial. Stroke 37 (2006) 186-192
13. Nudo R.J. Functional and structural plasticity in motor cortex: implications for stroke recovery. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am 14 1 Suppl (2003) S57-S76
14. Teasell R., Bayona N., Salter K., Hellings C., and Bitensky J. Progress in clinical neurosciences: stroke recovery and rehabilitation. Can J Neurol Sci 33 (2006) 357-364
15. Barker R.N., and Brauer S.G. Upper limb recovery after stroke: the stroke survivors' perspective. Disabil Rehabil 27 (2005) 1213-1223
16. Cirstea M.C., Ptito A., and Levin M.F. Arm reaching improvements with short-term practice depend on the severity of the motor deficit in stroke. Exp Brain Res 152 (2003) 476-488
17. Kleim J.A., and Jones T.A. Principles of experience-dependent neural plasticity: implications for rehabilitation after brain damage. J Speech Lang Hear Res 51 (2008) S225-S239
18. Wolf S.L., Winstein C.J., Miller J.P., et al. Effect of constraint-induced movement therapy on upper extremity function 3 to 9 months after stroke: the EXCITE randomized clinical trial. JAMA 296 (2006) 2095-2104
19. Schultheis M.T., Himelstein J., and Rizzo A.A. Virtual reality and neuropsychology: upgrading the Current Tools. J Head Trauma Rehabil 17 (2002) 378-394
20. Tinson D.J. How stroke patients spend their days: an observational study of the treatment regime offered to patients in hospital with movement disorders following stroke. Int Disabil Stud 11 (1989) 45-49
21. Sveistrup H. Motor rehabilitation using virtual reality. J Neuroeng Rehabil 10 (2004) 1-10
22. Holden M.K. Virtual environments for motor rehabilitation: review. Cyberpsychol Behav 8 (2005) 187-219
23. Foley N., Teasell R., Jutai J., Bhogal S., and Kruger E. Evidence-based review of stroke rehabilitation-upper extremity interventions. In: Teasell R., Foley N., Salter K., Bhogal S., Jutai J., and Speechley M. (Eds). Evidence-based review of stroke rehabilitation. 10th ed. (2007). http://www.ebrsr.com Accessed January 15, 2009
24. Henderson A., Korner-Bitensky N., and Levin M. Virtual reality in stroke rehabilitation: a systematic review of its effectiveness for upper limb motor recovery. Top Stroke Rehabil 14 (2007) 52-61
25. Viau A., Feldman A.G., McFadyen B.J., and Levin M.F. Reaching in reality and virtual reality: a comparison of movement kinematics in healthy subjects and in adults with hemiparesis. J Neuroengineering Rehabil 1 (2004) 11
26. Gowland C., Stratford P., Ward M., et al. Measuring physical impairment and disability with the Chedoke-McMaster Stroke Assessment. Stroke 24 (1993) 58-63
27. Fugl-Meyer A., Jaasko L., Leyman I., Olsson S., and Steglind S. The post-stroke hemiplegic patient I: a method for evaluation of physical performance. Scand J Rehabil Med 7 (1975) 11-17
28. Duncan P., Goldstein L.B., Matchar D., Divine G.W., and Feussner J. Measurement of motor recovery after stroke: outcome assessment and sample size requirements. Stroke 23 (1992) 1084-1089
29. Nadeau S., Arsenault A.B., Gravel D., Lepage Y., and Bourbonnais D. Analysis of the spasticity index used in adults with a stroke. Can J Rehabil 11 (1998) 219-220
30. Levin M.F., and Hui-Chan C. Are H and stretch reflexes in hemiparesis reproducible and correlated with spasticity?. J Neurol 240 (1993) 63-71
31. Subramanian S., Knaut L.A., Beaudoin C., McFadyen B.J., Feldman A.G., and Levin M.F. Virtual reality environments for post-stroke arm rehabilitation. J Neuroengineering Rehabil 4 (2007) 20
32. Lo W.T., and So R.H. Cybersickness in the presence of scene rotational movements along different axes. Appl Ergon 32 (2001) 1-14
33. Regan E.C., and Price K.R. The frequency of occurrence and severity of side-effects of immersion virtual reality. Aviat Space Environ Med 65 (1994) 527-530
34. Archambault P., Pigeon P., Feldman A.G., and Levin M.F. Recruitment and sequencing of different degrees of freedom during pointing movements involving the trunk in healthy and hemiparetic subjects. Exp Brain Res 126 (1999) 55-67
35. Satava R.M. Medical applications of virtual reality. J Med Syst 19 (1995) 275-280
36. Dumay A.C. Medicine in virtual environments. Technol Health Care 3 (1995) 75-89
37. Rose F.D., Attree E.A., and Johnson D.A. Virtual reality: an assistive technology in neurological rehabilitation. Curr Opin Neurol 9 (1996) 461-467
38. Wilson P.N., Foreman N., and Stanton D. Virtual reality, disability and rehabilitation. Disabil Rehabil 19 (1997) 213-220
39. Jang S.H., You S.H., Hallett M., et al. Cortical reorganization and associated functional motor recovery after virtual reality in patients with chronic stroke: an experimenter-blind preliminary study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 86 (2005) 2218-2223
40. You S.H., Jang S.H., Kim Y.H., et al. Virtual reality-induced cortical reorganization and associated locomotor recovery in chronic stroke: an experimenter-blind randomized study. Stroke 36 (2005) 1166-1171
41. Latash M.L. Virtual reality: a fascinating tool for motor rehabilitation (to be used with caution). Disabil Rehabil 20 (1998) 104-105
42. Stoffregen T.A., and Bardy B.G. On specification and the senses. Behav Brain Sci 24 (2001) 195-261
43. Rochat P., and Wraga M. An account of the systematic error in judging what is reachable. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 23 (1997) 199-212
44. Cumming B.G., and DeAngelis G.C. The physiology of stereopsis. Annu Rev Neurosci 24 (2001) 203-238
45. Servos P. Distance estimation in the visual and visuomotor systems. Exp Brain Res 130 (2000) 35-47
46. Interrante V, Anderson L, Ries B. Distance perception in immersive virtual environments, revisited. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Virtual Reality Conference; 2006 March 25-29; Alexandria, VA.
47. Perani D., Fazio F., Borghese N.A., et al. Different brain correlates for watching real and virtual hand actions. Neuroimage 14 (2001) 749-758
48. Janssen P., Vogels R., and Orban G.A. Selectivity for 3D shape that reveals distinct areas within macaque inferior temporal cortex. Science 288 (2000) 2054-2056
49. Decety J., Grezes J., Costes N., et al. Brain activity during observation of actions: influence of action content and subject's strategy. Brain 120 (1997) 1763-1777
50. Decety J. Do imagined and executed actions share the same neural substrate?. Brain Res Cogn Brain Res 3 (1996) 87-93
51. Sakata H., Taira M., Kusunoki M., Murata A., and Tanaka Y. The TINS Lecture: the parietal association cortex in depth perception and visual control of hand action. Trends Neurosci 20 (1997) 350-357
52. Inoue K., Kawashima R., Satoh K., et al. PET study of pointing with visual feedback of moving hands. J Neurophysiol 79 (1998) 117-125
53. Ketcham C.J., Dounskaia N.V., and Stelmach G.E. The role of vision in the control of continuous multijoint movements. J Mot Behav 38 (2006) 29-44
54. Rossetti Y., Desmurget M., and Prablanc C. Vectorial coding of movement: vision, proprioception, or both?. J Neurophysiol 74 (1995) 457-463
55. Saunders J.A., and Knill D.C. Humans use continuous visual feedback from the hand to control both the direction and distance of pointing movements. Exp Brain Res 162 (2005) 458-473
56. Sergio L.E., and Scott S.H. Hand and joint paths during reaching movements with and without vision. Exp Brain Res 122 (1998) 157-164
57. Knapp J.M., and Loomis J.M. Limited field of view of head-mounted displays is not the cause of distance underestimation in virtual environments. Presence 13 (2004) 572-577
58. Loftus A., Murphy S., McKenna I., and Mon-Williams M. Reduced fields of view are neither necessary nor sufficient for distance underestimation but reduce precision and may cause calibration problems. Exp Brain Res 158 (2004) 328-335
59. Creem-Regehr S.H., Willemsen P., Gooch A.A., and Thompson W.B. The influence of restricted viewing conditions on egocentric distance perception: implications for real and virtual indoor environments. Perception 34 (2005) 191-204
60. Gonzalez-Alvarez C., Subramanian A., and Pardhan S. Reaching and grasping with restricted peripheral vision. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 27 (2007) 265-274
61. Helbig C.R., and Gabbard C. What determines limb selection for reaching?. Res Q Exerc Sport 75 (2004) 47-59
62. Weiss P.L., Rand D., Katz N., and Kizony. Video capture virtual reality as a flexible and effective rehabilitation tool. J NeuroEng Rehabil 1 (2004) 12