Intensive virtual reality-based training for upper limb motor function in chronic stroke: A feasibility study using a single case experimental design and fMRI

Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology

Volumn 10, Issue 5, 2015, Pages 385-392

  Schuster Amft, Corina ^a,b   Henneke, Andrea ^a   Hartog Keisker, Birgit ^c   Holper, Lisa ^c   Siekierka, Ewa ^d   Chevrier, Edith ^e,f   Pyk, Pawel ^e,f   Kollias, Spyros ^c   Kiper, Daniel ^e   Eng, Kynan ^e,f  

^a Reha Rheinfelden   (Switzerland)

^b BERN UNIVERSITY OF APPLIED SCIENCES   (Switzerland)

^c UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^d UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^e UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^f YouRehab Ltd   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Motor function; stroke; upper limb; virtual reality

Indexed keywords

CASE REPORT; CHRONIC DISEASE; COMPUTER INTERFACE; COMPUTER SIMULATION; CONVALESCENCE; DAILY LIFE ACTIVITY; FEASIBILITY STUDY; HUMAN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PHYSIOTHERAPY; STROKE; UPPER LIMB;

ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING; CHRONIC DISEASE; COMPUTER SIMULATION; FEASIBILITY STUDIES; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PHYSICAL THERAPY MODALITIES; RECOVERY OF FUNCTION; STROKE; UPPER EXTREMITY; USER-COMPUTER INTERFACE;

EID: 84937210631     PISSN: 17483107     EISSN: 17483115     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3109/17483107.2014.908963     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Henderson A, Korner-Bitensky N, Levin M. Virtual reality in stroke rehabilitation: a systematic review of its effectiveness for upper limb motor recovery. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2007; 14: 52-61
2. Crosbie JH, Lennon S, Basford JR, McDonough SM. Virtual reality in stroke rehabilitation: still more virtual than real. Disabil Rehabil. 2007; 29: 1139-46
3. Laver KE, George S, Thomas S, et al. Virtual reality for stroke rehabilitation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011; (9): CD008349. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008349.pub2
4. Galvin J, McDonald R, Catroppa C, Anderson V. Does intervention using virtual reality improve upper limb function in children with neurological impairment: a systematic review of the evidence. Brain Inj. 2011; 25: 435-42
5. Gaggioli A, Meneghini A, Morganti F, et al A strategy for computer-Assisted mental practice in stroke rehabilitation. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2006; 20: 503-7
6. Holden M. Virtual environments for motor rehabilitation: review. Cyberpsychol Behav. 2005; 8: 187-211
7. Takahashi CD, Der-Yeghiaian L, Le V, et al. Robot-based hand motor therapy after stroke. Brain. 2008; 131: 425-37
8. Johansson BB. Current trends in stroke rehabilitation A review with focus on brain plasticity. Acta Neurol Scand. 2011; 123: 147-59
9. Buccino G, Binkofski F, Riggio L. The mirror neuron system and action recognition. Brain Lang. 2004; 89: 370-6
10. Buccino G, Binkofski F, Fink G, et al. Action observation activates premotor and parietal areas in a somatotopic manner: an fMRI study. Eur J Neurosci. 2001; 13: 400-4
11. Fadiga L, Fogassi L, Pavesi G, Rizzolatti G. Motor facilitation during action observation: a magnetic stimulation study. J Neurophysiol. 1995; 73: 2608-11
12. Altschuler E, Wisdom S, Stone L, et al. Rehabilitation of hemiparesis after stroke with a mirror. Lancet. 1999; 353: 2035-6
13. Wille D, Eng K, Holper L, et al. Virtual reality-based paediatric interactive therapy system (PITS) for improvement of arm and hand function in children with motor impairment - A pilot study. Dev Neurorehabil. 2009; 12: 44-52
14. Siekierka EM, Eng K, Bassetti C, et al. New technologies and concepts for rehabilitation in the acute phase of stroke: a collaborative matrix. Neurodegener Dis. 2007; 4: 57-69
15. Nedelko V, Hassa T, Hamzei F, et al. Action imagery combined with action observation activates more corticomotor regions than action observation alone. J Neurol Phys Ther. 2012; 36: 182-8
16. Barreca S, Gowland CK, Stratford P, et al. Development of the Chedoke Arm and Hand Activity Inventory: theoretical constructs, item generation, and selection. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2004; 11: 31-42
17. Schuster C, Hahn S, Ettlin T. Objectively-Assessed outcome measures: a translation and cross-cultural adaptation procedure applied to the Chedoke McMaster Arm and Hand Activity Inventory (CAHAI). BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010; 10: 106
18. Gowland C, Stratford P, Ward M, et al. Measuring physical impairment and disability with the Chedoke-McMaster Stroke Assessment. Stroke. 1993; 24: 58-63
19. Gowland C, VanHullenaar S, Torresin W, et al. Chedoke-McMaster Stroke Assessment: development, validation, and administration manual. Hamilton (ON): School of Rehabilitation Science, McMaster University; 1995
20. Gowland CA. Staging motor impairment after stroke. Stroke. 1990; 21: II19-21
21. Jansa J, Pogacnik T, Gompertz P. An evaluation of the Extended Barthel Index with acute ischemic stroke patients. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2004; 18: 37-41
22. Prosiegel M, Böttger S, Schenk T, et al. Der Erweiterte Barthel-Index (EBI) - eine neue Skala zur Erfassung von Fähigkeitsstö rungen bei neurologischen Patienten. Neurol Rehabil. 1996; 1: 7-13
23. Uswatte G, Taub E, Morris D, et al. The Motor Activity Log-28: assessing daily use of the hemiparetic arm after stroke. Neurology. 2006; 67: 1189-94
24. Bovend'Eerdt TJ, Botell RE, Wade DT. Writing SMART rehabilitation goals and achieving goal attainment scaling: a practical guide. Clin Rehabil. 2009; 23: 352-61
25. Kiresuk TJ. Goal attainment scaling: a general method of evaluating comprehensive mental health programmes. Commun Mental Health J. 1968; 4: 443-53
26. Pruessmann KP, Weiger M, Scheidegger MB, Boesiger P. SENSE: sensitivity encoding for fast MRI. Magn Reson Med. 1999; 42: 952-62
27. Talairach J, Tournoux P. Co-planar stereotaxic atlas of the human brain: 3-dimensional proportional system: an approach to cerebral imaging. Stuttgart [etc.]: Georg Thieme; 1988. VIII, 122 S.p.
28. 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: 189-98
29. Oldfield RC. The assessment and analysis of handedness: the Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychol. 1971; 9: 97-113
30. Albert ML A simple test of visual neglect. Neurology. 1973; 23: 658-64
31. Campbell JM. Statistical comparison of four effect sizes for singlesubject designs. Behav Modif. 2004; 28: 234-46
32. Campell JM. Efficacy of behavioral interventions for reducing problem behavior in persons with autism: a quantitative syntehsis of single-subject research. Res Dev Disabil. 2003; 24: 120-38
33. Kwakkel G, van Peppen R, Wagenaar RC, et al. Effects of augmented exercise therapy time after stroke: a meta-Analysis. Stroke. 2004; 35: 2529-39
34. Dodds TA, Martin DP, Stolov WC, Deyo RA A validation of the functional independence measurement and its performance among rehabilitation inpatients. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1993; 74: 531-6
35. Calautti C, Baron JC. Functional neuroimaging studies of motor recovery after stroke in adults: a review. Stroke. 2003; 34: 1553-66
36. Cirstea CM, Nudo RJ, Craciunas SC, et al. Neuronal-glial alterations in non-primary motor areas in chronic subcortical stroke. Brain Res. 2012; 1463: 75-84
37. Carey JR, Kimberley TJ, Lewis SM, et al. Analysis of fMRI and finger tracking training in subjects with chronic stroke. Brain. 2002; 125: 773-88
38. Fridman EA, Hanakawa T, Chung M, et al. Reorganization of the human ipsilesional premotor cortex after stroke. Brain. 2004; 127: 747-58
39. Johansen-Berg H, Rushworth MF, Bogdanovic MD, et al. The role of ipsilateral premotor cortex in hand movement after stroke. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2002; 99: 14518-23
40. Lotze M, Beutling W, Loibl M, et al. Contralesional motor cortex activation depends on ipsilesional corticospinal tract integrity in well-recovered subcortical stroke patients. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2012; 26: 594-603
41. Stagg CJ, Bachtiar V, O'Shea J, et al. Cortical activation changes underlying stimulation-induced behavioural gains in chronic stroke. Brain. 2011; 135: 276-84
42. Zimerman M, Heise KF, Gerloff C, et al. Disrupting the ipsilateral motor cortex interferes with training of a complex motor task in older adults. Cereb Cortex. 2014; 24: 1030-6