Improvement After Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy

Background. Constraint-induced movement therapy (CIMT) has proven effective in increasing functional use of the affected arm in patients with chronic stroke. The mechanism of CIMT is not well understood. Objective. To demonstrate, in a proof-of-concept study, the feasibility of using kinematic measures in conjunction with clinical outcome measures to better understand the mechanism of recovery in chronic stroke patients with mild to moderate motor impairments who undergo CIMT. Methods. A total of 10 patients with chronic stroke were enrolled in a modified CIMT protocol over 2 weeks. Treatment response was assessed with the Action Research Arm Test (ARAT), the Upper-Extremity Fugl-Meyer score (FM-UE), and kinematic analysis of visually guided arm and wrist movements. All assessments were performed twice before the therapeutic intervention and once afterward. Results. There was a clinically meaningful improvement in ARAT from the second pre-CIMT session to the post-CIMT session compared with the change between the 2 pre-CIMT sessions. In contrast, FM-UE and kinematic measures showed no meaningful improvements. Conclusions. Functional improvement in the affected arm after CIMT in patients with chronic stroke appears to be mediated through compensatory strategies rather than a decrease in impairment or return to more normal motor control. We suggest that future large-scale studies of new interventions for neurorehabilitation track performance using kinematic analyses as well as clinical scales.

[1]  B. Prilutsky,et al.  Gains in Upper Extremity Function After Stroke via Recovery or Compensation: Potential Differential Effects on Amount of Real-World Limb Use , 2009, Topics in stroke rehabilitation.

[2]  Ching-yi Wu,et al.  Effects of Modified Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy on Movement Kinematics and Daily Function in Patients With Stroke: A Kinematic Study of Motor Control Mechanisms , 2007, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.

[3]  P. Morasso.  Spatial control of arm movements , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

[4]  Edward Taub,et al.  Constraint-induced movement therapy for chronic stroke hemiparesis and other disabilities. , 2004, Restorative neurology and neuroscience.

[5]  M. Levin,et al.  Compensatory strategies for reaching in stroke. , 2000, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[6]  S. Wolf,et al.  The Effects of Constraint-Induced Therapy on Precision Grip: A Preliminary Study , 2004, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.

[7]  Maarten J. IJzerman,et al.  Systematic review of the effect of robot-aided therapy on recovery of the hemiparetic arm after stroke. , 2006, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[8]  H. Krebs,et al.  Effects of Robot-Assisted Therapy on Upper Limb Recovery After Stroke: A Systematic Review , 2008, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.

[9]  R A Abrams,et al.  Optimality in human motor performance: ideal control of rapid aimed movements. , 1988, Psychological review.

[10]  Marco Santello,et al.  Compensatory motor control after stroke: an alternative joint strategy for object-dependent shaping of hand posture. , 2010, Journal of neurophysiology.

[11]  S. Page,et al.  Efficacy of modified constraint-induced movement therapy in chronic stroke: a single-blinded randomized controlled trial. , 2004, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[12]  B. Volpe,et al.  Kinematic Robot-Based Evaluation Scales and Clinical Counterparts to Measure Upper Limb Motor Performance in Patients With Chronic Stroke , 2010, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.

[13]  D. Arciniegas,et al.  Constraint-induced movement therapy after stroke: efficacy for patients with minimal upper-extremity motor ability. , 2005, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[14]  Eliseo Stefano Maini,et al.  Using Kinematic Analysis to Evaluate Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy in Chronic Stroke Patients , 2008, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.

[15]  Janice I. Glasgow,et al.  Assessment of Upper-Limb Sensorimotor Function of Subacute Stroke Patients Using Visually Guided Reaching , 2010, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.

[16]  I. Whishaw,et al.  Both compensation and recovery of skilled reaching following small photothrombotic stroke to motor cortex in the rat , 2009, Experimental Neurology.

[17]  J. P. Miller,et al.  Effect of constraint-induced movement therapy on upper extremity function 3 to 9 months after stroke: the EXCITE randomized clinical trial. , 2006, JAMA.

[18]  Konrad Paul Kording,et al.  Statistics of Natural Movements Are Reflected in Motor Errors , 2009, Journal of neurophysiology.

[19]  A. Eagger.  Rehabilitation , 1960 .

[20]  Li-ling Chuang,et al.  Randomized Trial of Distributed Constraint-Induced Therapy Versus Bilateral Arm Training for the Rehabilitation of Upper-Limb Motor Control and Function After Stroke , 2011, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.

[21]  W. Rymer,et al.  Deficits in the coordination of multijoint arm movements in patients with hemiparesis: evidence for disturbed control of limb dynamics , 2000, Experimental Brain Research.

[22]  W. J. Powers,et al.  Very Early Constraint-Induced Movement during Stroke Rehabilitation (VECTORS) , 2009, Neurology.

[23]  J. Krakauer,et al.  An Implicit Plan Overrides an Explicit Strategy during Visuomotor Adaptation , 2006, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[24]  Joanne M Wagner,et al.  Measurement of upper-extremity function early after stroke: properties of the action research arm test. , 2006, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[25]  R. Ivry,et al.  The coordination of movement: optimal feedback control and beyond , 2010, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[26]  J. Szaflarski,et al.  Modified Constraint-Induced Therapy in Chronic Stroke: Results of a Single-Blinded Randomized Controlled Trial , 2008, Physical Therapy.

[27]  Kinematic Analysis of Head, Trunk, and Pelvis Movement When People Early After Stroke Reach Sideways , 2011, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.

[28]  T. Murphy,et al.  Plasticity during stroke recovery: from synapse to behaviour , 2009, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[29]  N. Yozbatiran,et al.  A Standardized Approach to Performing the Action Research Arm Test , 2008, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.

[30]  D. Mozaffarian,et al.  Heart disease and stroke statistics--2010 update: a report from the American Heart Association. , 2010, Circulation.

[31]  M. Levin,et al.  What Do Motor “Recovery” and “Compensation” Mean in Patients Following Stroke? , 2009, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.

[32]  J. Krakauer,et al.  Getting Neurorehabilitation Right , 2012, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.

[33]  J. Gordon,et al.  Accuracy of planar reaching movements , 1994, Experimental Brain Research.

[34]  Joanne M Wagner,et al.  Recovery of Grasp versus Reach in People with Hemiparesis Poststroke , 2006, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.

[35]  Sandeep K Subramanian,et al.  Validity of Movement Pattern Kinematics as Measures of Arm Motor Impairment Poststroke , 2010, Stroke.

[36]  J. Krakauer,et al.  Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair Inter-individual Variability in the Capacity for Motor Recovery after Ischemic Stroke Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair Additional Services and Information for Inter-individual Variability in the Capacity for Motor Recovery after Ischemic Stroke , 2022 .

[37]  Ke-Hu Yang,et al.  Modified constraint-induced movement therapy versus traditional rehabilitation in patients with upper-extremity dysfunction after stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. , 2011, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[38]  J. Grotta,et al.  Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy During Early Stroke Rehabilitation , 2007, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.

[39]  M. Levin.  Interjoint coordination during pointing movements is disrupted in spastic hemiparesis. , 1996, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[40]  A. Fugl-Meyer,et al.  The post-stroke hemiplegic patient. 1. a method for evaluation of physical performance. , 1975, Scandinavian journal of rehabilitation medicine.

[41]  N. Hogan,et al.  Submovement changes characterize generalization of motor recovery after stroke , 2009, Cortex.

[42]  R. Lyle.  A performance test for assessment of upper limb function in physical rehabilitation treatment and research , 1981, International journal of rehabilitation research. Internationale Zeitschrift fur Rehabilitationsforschung. Revue internationale de recherches de readaptation.

[43]  Wolfram Tetzlaff,et al.  Proximal and distal impairments in rat forelimb use in reaching follow unilateral pyramidal tract lesions , 1993, Behavioural Brain Research.

[44]  Ching-yi Wu,et al.  Kinematic and clinical analyses of upper-extremity movements after constraint-induced movement therapy in patients with stroke: a randomized controlled trial. , 2007, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[45]  G. Kwakkel,et al.  Probability of regaining dexterity in the flaccid upper limb: impact of severity of paresis and time since onset in acute stroke. , 2003, Stroke.

[46]  J. Szaflarski,et al.  Cortical reorganization following modified constraint-induced movement therapy: a study of 4 patients with chronic stroke. , 2006, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[47]  John W Krakauer,et al.  Learning of a sequential motor skill comprises explicit and implicit components that consolidate differently. , 2009, Journal of neurophysiology.

[48]  K. Mauritz,et al.  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. , 1999, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[49]  M. Schieber,et al.  Reduced muscle selectivity during individuated finger movements in humans after damage to the motor cortex or corticospinal tract. , 2004, Journal of neurophysiology.

[50]  S. Black,et al.  The Fugl-Meyer Assessment of Motor Recovery after Stroke: A Critical Review of Its Measurement Properties , 2002, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.

[51]  Ching-yi Wu,et al.  Effects of Constraint-Induced Therapy Versus Bilateral Arm Training on Motor Performance, Daily Functions, and Quality of Life in Stroke Survivors , 2009, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.

[52]  W. Rymer,et al.  Target-dependent differences between free and constrained arm movements in chronic hemiparesis , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

[53]  Ching-yi Wu,et al.  Pilot Trial of Distributed Constraint-Induced Therapy With Trunk Restraint to Improve Poststroke Reach to Grasp and Trunk Kinematics , 2012, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.

[54]  M. Thaut,et al.  The effects of constraint-induced therapy on kinematic outcomes and compensatory movement patterns: an exploratory study. , 2009, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[55]  M. Schieber,et al.  Differential impairment of individuated finger movements in humans after damage to the motor cortex or the corticospinal tract. , 2003, Journal of neurophysiology.

[56]  K. Sunnerhagen,et al.  Kinematic Variables Quantifying Upper-Extremity Performance After Stroke During Reaching and Drinking From a Glass , 2011, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.

[57]  Vincent S. Huang,et al.  Robotic neurorehabilitation: a computational motor learning perspective , 2009, Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation.

[58]  Steven L. Wolf,et al.  Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy Results in Increased Motor Map Area in Subjects 3 to 9 Months After Stroke , 2008, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.

[59]  B. Bussel,et al.  Motor compensation and recovery for reaching in stroke patients , 2003, Acta neurologica Scandinavica.

[60]  Ching-yi Wu,et al.  Responsiveness and Validity of Three Outcome Measures of Motor Function After Stroke Rehabilitation , 2009, Stroke.