Improving poststroke recovery: Neuroplasticity and task-oriented training

Current Treatment Options in Cardiovascular Medicine

Volumn 11, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 251-259

  Harvey, Richard L ^a  

^a REHABILITATION INSTITUTE OF CHICAGO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPUTER ASSISTED THERAPY; CONSTRAINT INDUCED THERAPY; FUNCTIONAL TRAINING; HEALTH CARE COST; HEMIPLEGIA; HUMAN; MOTOR DYSFUNCTION; MOTOR PERFORMANCE; NERVE CELL PLASTICITY; NEUROMUSCULAR ELECTRICAL STIMULATION; NONHUMAN; ORTHOSIS; PARAPLEGIA; PHYSIOTHERAPY; REHABILITATION CARE; REVIEW; ROBOTICS; STROKE; THERAPY EFFECT; TREADMILL EXERCISE;

EID: 65549139347     PISSN: 10928464     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11936-009-0026-4     Document Type: Review

References (53)

1. Rosamond W, Flegal K, Furie K, et al.: Heart disease and stroke statistics-2008 update: A report from the American Heart Association Statistics Committee and Stroke Statistics Subcommittee. Circulation 2008, 117:e25-e146.
2. Reding MJ, Potes E: Rehabilitation outcome following initial unilateral hemispheric stroke. Stroke 1988, 19:1354-1358.
3. Kwakkel G, Kollen BJ, van der Grond J, Prevo AJH: Probability of regaining dexterity in the flaccid upper limb: Impact of severity of paresis and time since onset in acute stroke. Stroke 2003, 34:2181-2186.
4. Edgerton VR, Tillakaratne NJK, Bigbee AJ, et al.: Plasticity of the spinal neural circuitry after injury. Ann Rev Neurosci 2004, 27:145-167.
5. Nudo RJ, Milliken GW, Jenkins GW, Merzenich MM: Use-dependent alterations of movement representations in primary motor cortex of adult squirrel monkeys. J Neurosci 1996, 16:785-807.
6. Rosenkranz K, Kakar A, Rothwell JC: Differential modulation of motor cortical plasticity and excitability in early and late phases of human motor learning. J Neurosci 2007, 27:12058-12066.
7. Wolpaw JR, Tennissen AM: Activity-dependent spinal cord plasticity in health and disease. Ann Rev Neurosci 2001, 24:807-843.
8. Winstein CJ, Wolf SL: Task-oriented training to promote upper extremity recovery. In Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation. Edited by Stein J, Harvey RL, Macko RF, et al. New York: Demos Medical; 2008:267-290.
9. Nudo RJ: Postinfarct cortical plasticity and behavioral recovery. Stroke 2007, 38:840-845.
10. Hebb DO: The Organization of Behavior. New York: Wiley; 1949.
11. Bliss TVP, CollingridgL GL: A synaptic model of memory: long-term potentiation in the hippocampus. Nature 1993, 361:31-39.
12. Bliss TVP, Lomo T: Long-lasting potentiation of synaptic transmission in the dentate area of the anaesthetized rabbit following stimulation of the perforant path. J Physiol 1973, 232:331-356.
13. Hess G: Synaptic plasticity of local connections in rat motor cortex. Acta Neurobiol Exp (Wars) 2003, 63:271-276.
14. Monofils MH, VandenBerg PM, Kleim JA, Teskey GC: Long term potentiation induces expanded movement representations and dendritic hypertrophy in layer V of rat sensorimotor neocortex. Cerebral Cortex 2004, 14:586-593.
15. Kleim JA, Barbay S, Cooper NR, et al.: Motor learning-dependent synaptogenesis is localized to functionally reorganized motor cortex. Neurobiol Learning Mem 2002, 77:63-77.
16. Nudo RJ, Milliken GW: Reorganization of movement representations in primary motor cortex following focal ischemic infarcts in adult squirrel monkeys. J Neurophysiol 1996, 75: 2144-2149.
17. Taub E, Miller NE, Novack TA, et al.: Technique to improve chronic motor deficit after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1993, 74:347-354.
18. Taub E, Uswatte G, King DK, et al.: A placebo-controlled trial of constraint-induced movement therapy for upper extremity after stroke. Stroke 2006, 37:1045-1049.
19. Wolf SL, Winstein CJ, Miller JP, et al.: Effect of constraint-induced movement therapy on upper extremity function 3-9 months after stroke: The EXCITE randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2006, 296:2095-2104.
20. Sterr A, Elbert T, Berthold I, et al.: Longer versus shorter daily constraint-induced movement therapy of chronic hemiparesis: An exploratory study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2002, 83:1374-1377.
21. Dettmers C, Teske U, Hamzei F, et al.: Distributed form of constraint-induced movement therapy improves functional outcome and quality of life after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2005, 86:204-209.
22. Page SJ, Sisto S, Levine P, McGrath RE: Efficacy of modified constraint-induced movement therapy in chronic stroke: A single blinded randomized control trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2004, 85:14-18.
23. Dromerick AW, Edwards DF, Hahn EM: Does the application of constraint-induced movement therapy during acute rehabilitation reduce arm impairment after ischemic stroke? Stroke 2000, 31:2984-2988.
24. Cauraugh JH, Light K, Kim S, et al.: Chronic motor dysfunction after stroke: Recovering wrist and finger extension by electromyography-triggered neuromuscular stimulation. Stroke 2000, 31:1360-1364.
25. Kimberely TJ, Lewis SM, Auerbach EJ, et al.: Electrical stimulation driving functional improvements and cortical changes in subjects with stroke. Exp Brain Res 2004, 154:450-460.
26. de Kroon JR, van der Lee JH, Ijzerman MJ, Lankhorst GJ: Therapeutic electrical stimulation to improve motor control and functional abilities of the upper extremity after stroke: A systematic review. Clin Rehabil 2002, 16:350-360.
27. Alon G, Ring H: Gait and hand function enhancement following training with a multisegment hybrid orthosis stimulation system in stroke patients. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis 2003, 12:209-216.
28. Popovic DB, Popovic MB, Sinkjaer A, Schwirtlich L: Therapy of paretic arm in hemiplegic subjects augmented with a neural prosthesis: A cross-over study. Can J Phys Pharm 2004, 82:749-756.
29. Dunning K, Berberich A, Albers B, et al.: A four-week, task-specific neuroprosthesis program for a person with no active wrist or finger movement because of chronic stroke. Phys Ther 2008, 88:397-405.
30. Stein J, Hughes R, Fasoli SE, et al.: Technological aids for motor recovery. In Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation. Edited by Stein J, Harvey RL, Macko RF, et al. New York: Demos Medical; 2008.
31. Fasoli SE, Krebs HI, Stein J: Effects of robotic therapy on motor impairment and recovery in chronic stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2003, 84:477-482.
32. Volpe BT, Krebs HI, Hogan N, et al.: A novel approach to stroke rehabilitation: Robot-aided sensorimotor stimulation. Neurology 2000, 54:1938-1944.
33. 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.
34. 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 Rehab Res Dev 2006, 43:619-630.
35. Hesse S, Werner C, Pohl M, et al.: Computerized arm training improves the motor control of the severely affected arm after stroke: A single blinded randomized trial in two centers. Stroke 2005, 36:1960-1966.
36. Sanchez RJ, Liu J, Rao S, et al.: Automating arm movement training following severe stroke: Functional exercises with quantitative feedback in a gravity-reduced environment. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 2006, 14:378-389.
37. Kautz SA, Brown DA: Relationships between timing of muscle excitation and impaired motor performance during cyclical lower extremity movement in post-stroke hemiplegia. Brain 1998, 121:515-526.
38. Knutsson E, Richards C: Different types of disturbed motor control in gait of hemiparetic patients. Brain 1979, 102:405-430.
39. Finch L, BaNbeau H: Hemiplegic gait: new treatment strategies. Physiother Can 1985, 38:36-41.
40. Hesse S, Bertelt C, Schaffrin A, et al.: Restoration of gait in nonambulatory hemiparetic patients by treadmill training with partial body-weight support. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1994, 75:1087-1093.
41. Grillner S, Wallen P: Central pattern generators for locomotion, with special reference to vertebrates. Ann Rev Neurosci 1985, 8:233-261.
42. Hesse S, Bertelt C, Jahnke MT, et al.: Treadmill training with partial body weight support compared with physiotherapy in nonambulatory hemiparetic patients. Stroke 1995, 26:976-981.
43. Sullivan KJ, Brown DA, Klassen T, et al.: Effects of taskspecific locomotor and strength training in adults who were ambulatory after stroke: Results of the STEPS randomized clinical trial. Phys Ther 2007, 87:1580-1602.
44. Visintin M, Barbeau H, Korner-Bitensky N, Mayo NE: A new approach to retrain gait in stroke patients through body weight support and treadmill stimulation. Stroke 1998, 29:1122-1128.
45. Lindquist ARR, Prado CL, Barros RML, et al.: Gait training combining partial body weight support, a treadmill, and functional electrical stimulation: Effects on poststroke gait. Phys Ther 2007, 87:1144-1154.
46. Husemann B, Muller F, Krewer C, et al.: Effects of locomotion training with assistance of a robot-driven gait orthosis in hemiparetic patients after stroke: A randomized controlled pilot study. Stroke 2007, 38:349-354.
47. Hornby TG, Campbell DD, Kahn JH, et al.: Enhanced gait-related improvements after therapist-versus roboticassisted locomotor training in subjects with chronic stroke: A randomized controlled study. Stroke 2008, 39:1786-1792.
48. Luft AR, Macko RF, Forrester LW, et al.: Treadmill exercise activates subcortical neural networks and improves walking after stroke: A randomized controlled trial. Stroke 2008, 39:3341-3350.
49. Pohl M, Mehrholz J, Ritschel C, Ruckriem S: Speed-dependent treadmill training in ambulatory hemiparetic stroke patients: A randomized controlled trial. Stroke 2005, 33:553-558.
50. Harvey RL: Motor recoveNy after stroke: new directions in scientific inquiry. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am 2003, 14:S1-S5.
51. Taub E, Uswatte G, Morris DM: Improved motor recovery after stroke and massive cortical reorganization following constraint-induced movement therapy. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am 2003, 14:S77-S91.
52. Winstein CJ, Pohl PS, Lewthwaite R: Effects of physical guidance and knowledge of results on motor learning: Support for the guidance hypothesis. Res Q Exerc Sport 1994, 65:316-323.
53. 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.