Responsiveness of upper extremity kinematic measures and clinical improvement during the first three months after stroke

Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair

Volumn 27, Issue 9, 2013, Pages 844-853

  Alt Murphy, Margit ^a   Willén, Carin ^a   Sunnerhagen, Katharina S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GOTHENBURG   (Sweden)

Author keywords

instrumentation; kinematic; outcome assessment; recovery of function; stroke rehabilitation; task performance and analysis; upper extremity movement

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARM EXERCISE; ARTICLE; CEREBROVASCULAR ACCIDENT; DRINKING BEHAVIOR; EQUIPMENT; FEMALE; HUMAN; KINEMATICS; LINEAR REGRESSION ANALYSIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICAL DEVICE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; TASK PERFORMANCE; TECHNOLOGY; TRUNK;

INSTRUMENTATION; KINEMATIC; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; RECOVERY OF FUNCTION; STROKE REHABILITATION; TASK PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS; UPPER EXTREMITY MOVEMENT;

AGED; BIOMECHANICAL PHENOMENA; DRINKING; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; RECOVERY OF FUNCTION; ROC CURVE; STROKE; TIME FACTORS; UPPER EXTREMITY;

EID: 84885416598     PISSN: 15459683     EISSN: 15526844     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1545968313491008     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Nakayama H, Jorgensen HS, Raaschou HO, Olsen TS. Recovery of upper extremity function in stroke patients: the Copenhagen Stroke Study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1994 ; 75: 394-398
2. Parker VM, Wade DT, Langton Hewer R. Loss of arm function after stroke: measurement, frequency, and recovery. Int Rehabil Med. 1986 ; 8: 69-73
3. Kwakkel G, Wagenaar RC, Twisk JW, Lankhorst GJ, Koetsier JC. Intensity of leg and arm training after primary middle-cerebral-artery stroke: a randomised trial. Lancet. 1999 ; 354: 191-196
4. Salter K, Jutai J, Zettler L, et al EBRSR: Evidence-Based Review of Stroke Rehabilitation. Outcome Measures in Stroke Rehabilitation. 15 th ed. London, Ontario Canada: EBRSR; 2005-2012. London, Ontario Canada: EBRSR ; 2005-2012.
5. Alt Murphy M, Willen C, Sunnerhagen KS. Kinematic variables quantifying upper-extremity performance after stroke during reaching and drinking from a glass. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2011 ; 25: 71-80
6. Cirstea MC, Levin MF. Compensatory strategies for reaching in stroke. Brain. 2000 ; 123: 940-953
7. Levin MF. Interjoint coordination during pointing movements is disrupted in spastic hemiparesis. Brain. 1996 ; 119: 281-293
8. Subramanian SK, Yamanaka J, Chilingaryan G, Levin MF. Validity of movement pattern kinematics as measures of arm motor impairment poststroke. Stroke. 2010 ; 41: 2303-2308
9. Wagner JM, Dromerick AW, Sahrmann SA, Lang CE. Upper extremity muscle activation during recovery of reaching in subjects with post-stroke hemiparesis. Clin Neurophysiol. 2007 ; 118: 164-176
10. Massie C, Malcolm MP, Greene D, Thaut M. The effects of constraint-induced therapy on kinematic outcomes and compensatory movement patterns: an exploratory study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2009 ; 90: 571-579
11. Michaelsen SM, Dannenbaum R, Levin MF. Task-specific training with trunk restraint on arm recovery in stroke: randomized control trial. Stroke. 2006 ; 37: 186-192
12. Thielman GT, Dean CM, Gentile AM. Rehabilitation of reaching after stroke: task-related training versus progressive resistive exercise. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004 ; 85: 1613-1618
13. Caimmi M, Carda S, Giovanzana C, et al. Using kinematic analysis to evaluate constraint-induced movement therapy in chronic stroke patients. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2008 ; 22: 31-39
14. Patterson TS, Bishop MD, McGuirk TE, Sethi A, Richards LG. Reliability of upper extremity kinematics while performing different tasks in individuals with stroke. J Mot Behav. 2011 ; 43: 121-130
15. Schneiberg S, McKinley P, Gisel E, Sveistrup H, Levin MF. Reliability of kinematic measures of functional reaching in children with cerebral palsy. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2010 ; 52: e167 - e173
16. Platz T, Prass K, Denzler P, Bock S, Mauritz KH. Testing a motor performance series and a kinematic motion analysis as measures of performance in high-functioning stroke patients: reliability, validity, and responsiveness to therapeutic intervention. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1999 ; 80: 270-277
17. ed Vet HCW Measurement in Medicine: A Practical Guide. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press ; 2011 :
18. Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Knol DL, et al. The COSMIN checklist for evaluating the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties: a clarification of its content. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010 ; 10: 22
19. Husted JA, Cook RJ, Farewell VT, Gladman DD. Methods for assessing responsiveness: a critical review and recommendations. J Clin Epidemiol. 2000 ; 53: 459-468
20. de Yebenes Prous MJ, Rodriguez Salvanes F, Carmona Ortells L. Responsiveness of outcome measures. Reumatol Clin. 2008 ; 4: 240-247
21. van der Lee JH, Beckerman H, Lankhorst GJ, Bouter LM. The responsiveness of the Action Research Arm test and the Fugl-Meyer Assessment scale in chronic stroke patients. J Rehabil Med. 2001 ; 33: 110-113
22. Van der Lee JH, De Groot V, Beckerman H, Wagenaar RC, Lankhorst GJ, Bouter LM. The intra- and 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
23. Alt Murphy M, Persson HC, Danielsson A, Broeren J, Lundgren-Nilsson A, Sunnerhagen KS. SALGOT - Stroke Arm Longitudinal study at the University of Gothenburg, prospective cohort study protocol. BMC Neurol. 2011 ; 11: 56
24. Alt Murphy M, Sunnerhagen KS, Johnels B, Willen C. Three-dimensional kinematic motion analysis of a daily activity drinking from a glass: a pilot study. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2006 ; 3: 18
25. Alt Murphy M, Willen C, Sunnerhagen KS. Movement kinematics during a drinking task are associated with the activity capacity level after stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2012 ; 26: 1106-1115
26. Lyle RC. A performance test for assessment of upper limb function in physical rehabilitation treatment and research. Int J Rehabil Res. 1981 ; 4: 483-492
27. Yozbatiran N, Der-Yeghiaian L, Cramer SC. A standardized approach to performing the action research arm test. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2008 ; 22: 78-90
28. Hsieh CL, Hsueh IP, Chiang FM, Lin PH. Inter-rater reliability and validity of the action research arm test in stroke patients. Age Ageing. 1998 ; 27: 107-113
29. 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
30. 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
31. Bohannon RW, Smith MB. Interrater reliability of a modified Ashworth scale of muscle spasticity. Phys Ther. 1987 ; 67: 206-207
32. de Vet HC, Ostelo RW, Terwee CB, et al. Minimally important change determined by a visual method integrating an anchor-based and a distribution-based approach. Qual Life Res. 2007 ; 16: 131-142
33. de Vet HC, Terluin B, Knol DL, et al. Three ways to quantify uncertainty in individually applied "minimally important change" values. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010 ; 63: 37-45
34. Wagner JM, Rhodes JA, Patten C. Reproducibility and minimal detectable change of three-dimensional kinematic analysis of reaching tasks in people with hemiparesis after stroke. Phys Ther. 2008 ; 88: 652-663
35. Levin MF, Kleim JA, Wolf SL. What do motor "recovery" and "compensation" mean in patients following stroke?. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2009 ; 23: 313-319
36. Krakauer JW. Motor learning: its relevance to stroke recovery and neurorehabilitation. Curr Opin Neurol. 2006 ; 19: 84-90