Meaningful task-specific training (MTST) for stroke rehabilitation: A randomized controlled trial

Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation

Volumn 19, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 193-211

  Arya, Kamal Narayan ^a,b   Verma, Rajesh ^a   Garg, R K ^a   Sharma, V P ^a   Agarwal, Monika ^a   Aggarwal, G G ^c  

^a KING GEORGE'S MEDICAL UNIVERSITY   (India)

^b UNIVERSITY OF DELHI   (India)

^c UNIVERSITY OF LUCKNOW   (India)

Author keywords

hemiparesis; MTST; neuroplasticity; stroke; task specific training

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARM MOVEMENT; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; CONVALESCENCE; DOUBLE BLIND PROCEDURE; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MOTOR DYSFUNCTION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; REHABILITATION CARE; SCORING SYSTEM; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STROKE; TASK PERFORMANCE; TRAINING; TREATMENT DURATION; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL;

ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING; ADULT; ARM; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MOTOR SKILLS; NEURONAL PLASTICITY; PARESIS; PHYSICAL THERAPY MODALITIES; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; RECOVERY OF FUNCTION; STROKE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84862000907     PISSN: 10749357     EISSN: 19455119     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1310/tsr1903-193     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Chan DY, Chan CC, Au DK. Motor relearning programme for stroke patients: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Rehabil. 2006;20:191-200.
2. Hubbard IJ, Parsons MW, Neilson C, Carey LM. Task-specifi c training: evidence for and translation to clinical practice. Occup Ther Int. 2009;16:175-189.
3. Bayona NA, Bitensky J, Salter K, Teasell R. The role of task-specifi c training in rehabilitation therapies. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2005;12:58-65. (Pubitemid 41233414)
4. Nudo RJ, Friel KM, Delia SW. Role of sensory defi cits in motor impairments after injury to primary motor cortex. Neuropharmacology. 2000;39:733-742. (Pubitemid 30103678)
5. Lynskey JV, Belanger A, Jung R. Activity-dependent plasticity in spinal cord injury. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2008;45:229-240.
6. Cramer SC, Sur M, Dobkin BH, et al. Harnessing neuroplasticity for clinical applications. Brain. 2011;134:1591-1609.
7. Jang SH, Kim YH, Cho SH, Lee JH, Park JW, Kwon YH. Cortical reorganization induced by taskoriented training in chronic hemiplegic stroke patients. Neuroreport. 2003;14:137-141. (Pubitemid 36160756)
8. Luft AR, McCombe-Waller S, Whitall J, et al. Repetitive bilateral arm training and motor cortex activation in chronic stroke: A randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2004;292:1853-1861. (Pubitemid 40169296)
9. Richards L, Hanson C, Wellborn M, Sethi A. Driving motor recovery after stroke. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2008;15:397-411.
10. Dobkin BH. Clinical practice. Rehabilitation after stroke. N Engl J Med. 2005;352:1677-1684.
11. Gauthier LV, Taub E, Perkins C, Ortmann M, Mark VW, Uswatte G. Remodeling the brain: plastic structural brain changes produced by different motor therapies after stroke. Stroke. 2008;39:1520-1525.
12. Harvey RL. Improving poststroke recovery: neuroplasticity and task-oriented training. Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med. 2009;11:251-259.
13. Schmidt RA. Motor Control and Learning: A Behavioral Emphasis. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics; 2005.
14. Mulder T, Hochstenbach J. Adaptability and fl exibility of the human motor system: Implications for neurological rehabilitation. Neural Plast. 2001;8:131-140. (Pubitemid 32807610)
15. Arya KN, Pandian S, Verma R, Garg RK. Movement therapy induced neural reorganization and motor recovery in stroke: a review. J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2011;15:528-537.
16. Wolf SL, Winstein CJ, Miller JP, 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;296:2095-2104. (Pubitemid 44664704)
17. Daly JJ, Ruff RL. Construction of effi cacious gait and upper limb functional interventions based on brain plasticity evidence and model-based measures for stroke patients. Sci World J. 2007;7:2031-2045.
18. Kleim JA, Jones TA. Principles of experiencedependent neural plasticity: implications for rehabilitation after brain damage. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2008;51:S225-239. (Pubitemid 351206588)
19. Donnan GA, Fisher M, Macleod M, Davis SM. Stroke. Lancet. 2008;371:1612-1623. (Pubitemid 351626845)
20. Perry J, Garrett M, Gronley JK, Mulroy SJ. Classifi cation of walking handicap in the stroke population. Stroke. 1995;26:982-989.
21. Ganguli M, Ratcliff G, Chandra V, et al. A Hindi version of the MMSE: the development of a cognitive screening instrument for a largely illiterate rural elderly population in India. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 1995;10:367-377.
22. Dancer S, Brown AJ, Yanase LR. National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale reliable and valid in plain English. J Neurosci Nurs. 2009;41:2-5.
23. Sawner K, LaVigne J. Brunnstrom's Movement Therapy in Hemiplegia: A Neurophysiological Approach. Philadelphia: JB Lippincott; 1992.
24. Page SJ, Sisto S, Johnston MV, Levine P. Modifi ed constraint-induced therapy after subacute stroke: a preliminary study. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2002;16:290-295. (Pubitemid 34984903)
25. Taub E, Uswatte G, King DK, Morris D, Crago JE, Chatterjee A. A placebo-controlled trial of constraint-induced movement therapy for upper extremity after stroke. Stroke. 2006;37:1045-1049.
26. Bobath B. Adult Hemiplegia: Evaluation and Treatment. Butterworth-Heinemann; 1990.
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. Duncan PW, Propst M, Nelson SG. Reliability of the Fugl-Meyer assessment of sensorimotor recovery following cerebrovascular accident. Phys Ther. 1983;63:1606-1610. (Pubitemid 13010969)
29. Gladstone DJ, Danells CJ, Black SE. The Fugl-Meyer assessment of motor recovery after stroke: a critical review of its measurement properties. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2002;16:232-240. (Pubitemid 34984898)
30. Sanford J, Moreland J, Swanson LR, Stratford PW, Gowland C. Reliability of the Fugl-Meyer assessment for testing motor performance in patients following stroke. Phys Ther. 1993;73:447-454. (Pubitemid 23216237)
31. Lang CE, Edwards DF, Birkenmeier RL, Dromerick AW. Estimating minimal clinically important differences of upper-extremity measures early after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2008;89:1693-1700.
32. Van der Lee JH, De Groot V, Beckerman H, Wagenaar RC, Lankhorst GJ, Bouter LM. The intraand interrater reliability of the Action Research Arm Test: a practical test of upper extremity function in patients with stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2001;82:14-19. (Pubitemid 32057613)
33. Lin JH, Hsu MJ, Sheu CF, Wu TS, Lin RT, Chen CH, Hsieh CL. Psychometric comparisons of 4 measures for assessing upper-extremity function in people with stroke. Phys Ther. 2009;89:840-850.
34. Ang JH, Man DW. The discriminative power of the Wolf Motor Function Test in assessing upper extremity functions in persons with stroke. Int J Rehabil Res. 2006;29:357-361.
35. Woodbury M, Velozo CA, Thompson PA, et al. Measurement structure of the Wolf Motor Function Test: implications for motor control theory. Neurorehabil Neural Repair.24:791-801.
36. Morris DM, Uswatte G, Crago JE, Cook EW, 3rd, Taub E. The reliability of the Wolf Motor Function Test for assessing upper extremity function after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2001;82:750-755. (Pubitemid 32520783)
37. Wolf SL, Catlin PA, Ellis M, Archer AL, Morgan B, Piacentino A. Assessing Wolf Motor Function Test as outcome measure for research in patients after stroke. Stroke. 2001;32:1635-1639. (Pubitemid 32631916)
38. Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy Research Group. Manual:Graded Wolf Motor Function Test (Revised). University of Alabama at Birmingham and Birmingham Veteran's Administration Center. 2002.
39. Bonifer NM, Anderson KM, Arciniegas DB. Constraint-induced movement therapy after stroke: effi cacy for patients with minimal upperextremity motor ability. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;86:1867-1873. (Pubitemid 41354203)
40. Bonifer N, Anderson KM. Application of constraintinduced movement therapy for an individual with severe chronic upper-extremity hemiplegia. Phys Ther. 2003;83:384-398. (Pubitemid 36384343)
41. Whitall J, Savin DN, Jr, Harris-Love M, Waller SM. Psychometric properties of a modifi ed Wolf Motor Function Test for people with mild and moderate upper-extremity hemiparesis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2006;87:656-660.
42. Uswatte G, Taub E, Morris D, Vignolo M, McCulloch K. Reliability and validity of the upperextremity motor activity log-14 for measuring realworld arm use. Stroke. 2005;36:2493-2496. (Pubitemid 41566986)
43. Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy Research Group. Manual: Upper Extremity - Motor Activity Log. University of Alabama at Birmingham and Birmingham Veteran's Administration Center. 2004.
44. van der Lee JH, Beckerman H, Knol DL, de Vet HC, Bouter LM. Clinimetric properties of the motor activity log for the assessment of arm use in hemiparetic patients. Stroke. 2004;35:1410-1414. (Pubitemid 38697467)
45. Verma R, Arya KN, Garg RK. Task-oriented circuit class training program with motor imagery for gait rehabilitation in poststroke patients: a randomized controlled trial. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2011;18 Suppl 1:620-632.
46. Johansson BB. Brain plasticity and stroke rehabilitation. The Willis Lecture. Stroke. 2000;31:223-230. (Pubitemid 30035778)
47. Arya KN, Verma R, Garg RK. Estimating the minimal clinically important difference of an upper extremity recovery measure in subacute stroke patients. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2011; 18 Suppl 1:599-610.
48. Rose DK, Winstein CJ. Bimanual training after stroke: Are two hands better than one? Top Stroke Rehabil. 2004;11:20-30. (Pubitemid 39658415)
49. Sleimen-Malkoun R, Temprado JJ, Thefenne L, Berton E. Bimanual training in stroke: How do coupling and symmetry-breaking matter? BMC Neurol. 2011;11:11.
50. Carson RG. Neural pathways mediating bilateral interactions between the upper limbs. Brain Res Brain Res Rev. 2005;49:641-662. (Pubitemid 41548449)
51. Murase N, Duque J, Mazzocchio R, Cohen LG. Influence of interhemispheric interactions on motor function in chronic stroke. Ann Neurol. 2004;55:400-409. (Pubitemid 38269592)
52. Levin MF, Kleim JA, Wolf SL. What do motor "recovery" and "compensation" mean in patients following stroke? Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2009;23:313-319.
53. Hammer AM, Lindmark B. Effects of forced use on arm function in the subacute phase after stroke: a randomized, clinical pilot study. Phys Ther. 2009;89:526-539.
54. 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.
55. Kollen BJ, Lennon S, Lyons B, et al. The effectiveness of the bobath concept in stroke rehabilitation: What is the evidence? Stroke. 2009;40:e89-97.
56. Paci M. Physiotherapy based on the Bobath concept for adults with post-stroke hemiplegia: a review of effectiveness studies. J Rehabil Med. 2003;35:2-7. (Pubitemid 36204065)
57. French B, Thomas LH, Leathley MJ, et al. Repetitive task training for improving functional ability after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007:CD006073
58. Fure B, Wyller TB, Thommessen B. TOAST criteria applied in acute ischemic stroke. Acta Neurol Scand. 2005;112:254-258. (Pubitemid 41337074)
59. Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF, et al. Consort 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63:e1-37.