Robotic measurement of arm movements after stroke establishes biomarkers of motor recovery

Stroke

Volumn 45, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 200-204

  Krebs, Hermano I ^a   Krams, Michael ^h   Agrafiotis, Dimitris K ^c   Di Bernardo, Allitia ^b   Chavez, Juan C ^d   Littman, Gary S ^e   Yang, Eric ^c   Byttebier, Geert ^f   Dipietro, Laura ^a   Rykman, Avrielle ^g   McArthur, Kate ^b   Hajjar, Karim ^h,i   Lees, Kennedy R ^h   Volpe, Bruce T ^j  

^a Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge   (United States)

^b JANSSEN RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT   (United States)

^c Experimental Medicine ^*

^d BIOGEN   (United States)

^e GSL Statistical Consulting   (United States)

^f Bioconstat BVBA   (Belgium)

^g BURKE MEDICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^h UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW   (United Kingdom)

ⁱ UNIVERSITY OF DUISBURG ESSEN   (Germany)

^j FEINSTEIN INSTITUTE FOR MEDICAL RESEARCH   (United States)

more..

Author keywords

Biomarkers; Motor skills; Robotics; Sensory motor performance; Stroke

Indexed keywords

AGED; ARM MOVEMENT; ARTICLE; ARTIFICIAL NEURAL NETWORK; BRAIN ISCHEMIA; CEREBROVASCULAR ACCIDENT; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; EFFECT SIZE; FEMALE; HUMAN; KINEMATICS; KINETICS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEASUREMENT; MOTOR PERFORMANCE; NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH STROKE SCALE; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANKIN SCALE; ROBOTICS; SAMPLE SIZE;

BIOMARKERS; MOTOR SKILLS; ROBOTICS; SENSORY MOTOR PERFORMANCE; STROKE;

AGED; ARM; BIOLOGICAL MARKERS; BIOMECHANICAL PHENOMENA; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; ENDPOINT DETERMINATION; ETHNIC GROUPS; FEMALE; FUNCTIONAL LATERALITY; HUMANS; MALE; MODELS, ANATOMIC; MOVEMENT; NONLINEAR DYNAMICS; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; RECOVERY OF FUNCTION; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; ROBOTICS; STROKE;

EID: 85027920569     PISSN: 00392499     EISSN: 15244628     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.113.002296     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Miller EL, Murray L, Richards L, Zorowitz RD, Bakas T, Clark P, et al; American Heart Association Council on Cardiovascular Nursing and the Stroke Council. Comprehensive overview of nursing and interdisciplinary rehabilitation care of the stroke patient: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Stroke. 2010;41:2402-2448.
2. The National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke rt-PA Stroke Study Group. Tissue plasminogen activator for acute ischemic stroke. N Engl Med. 1995;333:1581-1587.
3. Hacke W, Kaste M, Bluhmki E, Brozman M, Dávalos A, Guidetti D, et al; ECASS Investigators. Thrombolysis with alteplase 3 to 4.5 hours after acute ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:1317-1329.
4. Marler JR, Tilley BC, Lu M, Brott TG, Lyden PC, Grotta JC, et al. Early stroke treatment associated with better outcome: the NINDS rt-PA stroke study. Neurology. 2000;55:1649-1655.
5. Cheng YD, Al-Khoury L, Zivin JA. Neuroprotection for ischemic stroke: two decades of success and failure. NeuroRx. 2004;1:36-45.
6. Krebs HI, Volpe BT, Ferraro M, Fasoli S, Palazzolo J, Rohrer B, et al. Robot-aided neurorehabilitation: from evidence-based to science-based rehabilitation. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2002;8:54-70.
7. Lo AC, Guarino PD, Richards LG, Haselkorn JK, Wittenberg GF, Federman DG, et al. Robot-assisted therapy for long-term upper-limb impairment after stroke. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:1772-1783.
8. Aisen ML, Krebs HI, Hogan N, McDowell F, Volpe BT. The effect of robot-assisted therapy and rehabilitative training on motor recovery following stroke. Arch Neurol. 1997;54:443-446.
9. Volpe BT, Krebs HI, Hogan N, Edelstein OTR L, Diels C, Aisen M. A novel approach to stroke rehabilitation: robot-aided sensorimotor stimulation. Neurology. 2000;54:1938-1944.
10. Management of Stroke Rehabilitation Working Group. VA/DOD clinical practice guideline for the management of stroke rehabilitation. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2010;47:1-43.
11. Kwakkel G, Kollen BJ, Krebs HI. Effects of robot-assisted therapy on upper limb recovery after stroke: a systematic review. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2008;22:111-121.
12. Norouzi-Gheidari N, Archambault PS, Fung J. Effects of robot-assisted therapy on stroke rehabilitation in upper limbs: systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2012;49:479-496.
13. Mehrholz J, Hädrich A, Platz T, Kugler J, Pohl M. Electromechanical and robot-assisted arm training for improving generic activities of daily living, arm function, and arm muscle strength after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;6:CD006876.
14. Krebs HI, Hogan N, Aisen ML, Volpe BT. Robot-aided neurorehabilitation. IEEE Trans Rehabil Eng. 1998;6:75-87.
15. Ali M, Bath PM, Curram J, Davis SM, Diener HC, Donnan GA, et al. The Virtual International Stroke Trials Archive. Stroke. 2007;38:1905-1910.
16. Kerr DM, Fulton RL, Lees KR; VISTA Collaborators. Seven-day NIHSS is a sensitive outcome measure for exploratory clinical trials in acute stroke: evidence from the Virtual International Stroke Trials Archive. Stroke. 2012;43:1401-1403.
17. Bosecker C, Dipietro L, Volpe B, Krebs HI. Kinematic robot-based evaluation scales and clinical counterparts to measure upper limb motor performance in patients with chronic stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2010;24:62-69.
18. Krebs HI, Aisen ML, Volpe BT, Hogan N. Quantization of continuous arm movements in humans with brain injury. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1999;96:4645-4649.
19. Dipietro L, Krebs HI, Fasoli SE, Volpe BT, Stein J, Bever C, et al. Changing motor synergies in chronic stroke. J Neurophysiol. 2007;98:757-768.
20. Haykin SS, Haykin SS. Neural Networks and Learning Machines. New York, NY: Prentice Hall; 2009.
21. Haykin SS. Neural Networks: A Comprehensive Foundation. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall; 1999.
22. Izrailev S, Agrafiotis DK. Variable selection for QSAR by artificial ant colony systems. SAR QSAR Environ Res. 2002;13:417-423.
23. Izrailev S, Agrafiotis DK. A method for quantifying and visualizing the diversity of QSAR models. J Mol Graph Model. 2004;22:275-284.
24. Agrafiotis DK, Cedeno W, Lobanov VS. On the use of neural network ensembles in QSAR and QSPR. J Chem Inf Comput Sci. 2002;42:903-911.
25. Agrafiotis DK. Stochastic proximity embedding. J Comput Chem. 2003;24:1215-1221.
26. Yang E, Liu P, Rassokhin DN, Agrafiotis DK. Stochastic proximity embedding on graphics processing units: taking multidimensional scaling to a new scale. J Chem Inf Model. 2011;51:2852-2859.
27. Fugl-Meyer AR, Jääskö L, Leyman I, Olsson S, Steglind S. The poststroke 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.
29. Gregson JM, Leathley MJ, Moore AP, Smith TL, Sharma AK, Watkins CL. Clinical measures: reliable or not? Age Ageing. 2001;30:86-87.
30. Gregson JM, Leathley MJ, Moore AP, Smith TL, Sharma AK, Watkins CL. Reliability of measurements of muscle tone and muscle power in stroke patients. Age Ageing. 2000;29:223-228.
31. Pallicino P, Snyder W, Granger C. The NIH stroke scale and the FIM in stroke rehabilitation. Stroke. 1992;23:919.
32. Goldstein LB, Bertels C, Davis JN. Interrater reliability of the NIH stroke scale. Arch Neurol. 1989;46:660-662.
33. Burn JP. Reliability of the modified Rankin Scale. Stroke. 1992;23:438.
34. Quinn TJ, McArthur K, Dawson J, Walters MR, Lees KR. Reliability of structured modified Rankin scale assessment. Stroke. 2010;41:e602, author reply e603.
35. Lees KR, Bath PM, Schellinger PD, Kerr DM, Fulton R, Hacke W, et al; European Stroke Organization Outcomes Working Group. Contemporary outcome measures in acute stroke research: choice of primary outcome measure. Stroke. 2012;43:1163-1170.