Arm Motor Recovery Using a Virtual Reality Intervention in Chronic Stroke

Introduction. Despite interest in virtual environments (VEs) for poststroke arm motor rehabilitation, advantages over physical environment (PE) training have not been established. Objective. The authors compared kinematic and clinical outcomes of dose-matched upper-limb training between a 3D VE and a PE in chronic stroke. Methods: Participants (n = 32) were randomized to a 3D VE or PE for training. They pointed to 6 workspace targets (72 trials, 12 trials/target, randomized) for 12 sessions over 4 weeks with similar feedback on precision, movement speed, and trunk displacement. Primary (kinematics, clinical arm motor impairment) and secondary (activity level, arm use) outcomes were compared by time (PRE, POST, and follow-up, RET), training environment, and impairment severity (mild, moderate-to-severe) using mixed-model analyses of variance (ANOVAs). Results. Endpoint speed, overall performance on a reach-to-grasp task, and activity levels increased in both groups. Only participants in the VE group improved shoulder horizontal adduction at POST (9.5°) and flexion at both POST (6.3°) and RET (13°). Impairment level affected outcomes. After VE training, the mild group increased elbow extension (RET, 25.5°). The moderate-to-severe group in VE increased arm use at POST (0.5 points) and reaching ability at RET (2.2 points). The moderate-to-severe group training in PE increased reaching ability earlier (POST, 1.7 points) and both elbow extension (10.7°) and arm use (0.4 points) at RET, but these changes were accompanied by increased compensatory trunk displacement (RET, 30.2 mm). Conclusion. VE training led to more changes in the mild group and a motor recovery pattern in the moderate-to-severe group indicative of less compensation, possibly because of a better use of feedback.

[1]  K. Sunnerhagen,et al.  Virtual Rehabilitation in an Activity Centre for Community-Dwelling Persons with Stroke , 2008, Cerebrovascular Diseases.

[2]  R. Nudo.  Adaptive plasticity in motor cortex: implications for rehabilitation after brain injury. , 2003, Journal of rehabilitation medicine.

[3]  Stephan P. Swinnen,et al.  Cognitive Effort and Motor Learning , 1994 .

[4]  A. Hannan,et al.  Enriched environments, experience-dependent plasticity and disorders of the nervous system , 2006, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[5]  A. G. Feldman,et al.  The origin and use of positional frames of reference in motor control , 1995, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[6]  D. Corbett,et al.  Brain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor Contributes to Recovery of Skilled Reaching After Focal Ischemia in Rats , 2009, Stroke.

[7]  Paul A Thompson,et al.  Measurement Structure of the Wolf Motor Function Test: Implications for Motor Control Theory , 2010, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.

[8]  S. McDonough,et al.  Virtual reality in stroke rehabilitation: Still more virtual than real , 2007, Disability and rehabilitation.

[9]  William A. Stock,et al.  Research Synthesis , 1996 .

[10]  E. Tunik,et al.  Innovative approaches to the rehabilitation of upper extremity hemiparesis using virtual environments. , 2009, European journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine.

[11]  H. Vet,et al.  Clinimetric Properties of the Motor Activity Log for the Assessment of Arm Use in Hemiparetic Patients , 2004, Stroke.

[12]  M. Levin,et al.  Virtual Reality in Stroke Rehabilitation: A Systematic Review of its Effectiveness for Upper Limb Motor Recovery , 2007, Topics in stroke rehabilitation.

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

[14]  D. Reisman,et al.  Observation of amounts of movement practice provided during stroke rehabilitation. , 2009, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[15]  E. Brenner,et al.  Judging distance from ocular convergence , 1998, Vision Research.

[16]  Arm motor rehabilitation in chronic stroke: Effects of two training environments , 2011, 2011 International Conference on Virtual Rehabilitation.

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

[18]  P. Duncan,et al.  Fugl-Meyer Assessment of Sensorimotor Function After Stroke: Standardized Training Procedure for Clinical Practice and Clinical Trials , 2011, Stroke.

[19]  Susanne Iwarsson,et al.  Indicators for return to work after stroke and the importance of work for subjective well-being and life satisfaction. , 2003, Journal of rehabilitation medicine.

[20]  A. Rizzo,et al.  The application of virtual reality technology in rehabilitation. , 2001 .

[21]  J. Verbunt,et al.  Assessment of arm activity using triaxial accelerometry in patients with a stroke. , 2011, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[22]  G. Guyatt,et al.  Generic and specific measurement of health-related quality of life in a clinical trial of respiratory rehabilitation. , 1999, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[23]  Mark Hallett,et al.  Cortical reorganization and associated functional motor recovery after virtual reality in patients with chronic stroke: an experimenter-blind preliminary study. , 2005, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[24]  Pamela W. Duncan,et al.  Similar Motor Recovery of Upper and Lower Extremities After Stroke , 1994, Stroke.

[25]  J. Kleim,et al.  Principles of experience-dependent neural plasticity: implications for rehabilitation after brain damage. , 2008, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[26]  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 .

[27]  Agnès Roby-Brami,et al.  Use of the trunk for reaching targets placed within and beyond the reach in adult hemiparesis , 2002, Experimental Brain Research.

[28]  Sandeep K Subramanian,et al.  Does Provision of Extrinsic Feedback Result in Improved Motor Learning in the Upper Limb Poststroke? A Systematic Review of the Evidence , 2010, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.

[29]  A. Mirelman,et al.  Effects of Training With a Robot-Virtual Reality System Compared With a Robot Alone on the Gait of Individuals After Stroke , 2009, Stroke.

[30]  M. Levin,et al.  Development and validation of a scale for rating motor compensations used for reaching in patients with hemiparesis: the reaching performance scale. , 2004, Physical therapy.

[31]  Sandeep K Subramanian,et al.  Virtual reality environments for post-stroke arm rehabilitation , 2007, Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation.

[32]  Geoffrey P. Bingham,et al.  Ontological issues in distance perception: Cue use under full cue conditions cannot be inferred from use under controlled conditions , 2008, Perception & psychophysics.

[33]  P. Stratford,et al.  Measuring Physical Impairment and Disability With the Chedoke‐McMaster Stroke Assessment , 1993, Stroke.

[34]  R. Ryan,et al.  Intrinsic motivation and the effects of self-consciousness, self-awareness, and ego-involvement: An investigation of internally controlling styles , 1985 .

[35]  S. Wolf,et al.  Assessing Wolf Motor Function Test as Outcome Measure for Research in Patients After Stroke , 2001, Stroke.

[36]  G. Kwakkel,et al.  Effects of intensity of rehabilitation after stroke. A research synthesis. , 1997, Stroke.

[37]  P. Tonin,et al.  Motor Learning Principles for Rehabilitation: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Study in Poststroke Patients , 2010, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.

[38]  H. Hermens,et al.  Nature, timing, frequency and type of augmented feedback; does it influence motor relearning of the hemiparetic arm after stroke? A systematic review , 2010, Disability and rehabilitation.

[39]  M. Levin,et al.  Improvement of Arm Movement Patterns and Endpoint Control Depends on Type of Feedback During Practice in Stroke Survivors , 2007, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.

[40]  R. Nudo,et al.  Cortical plasticity after stroke: implications for rehabilitation. , 1999, Revue neurologique.

[41]  P A Thompson,et al.  The Motor Activity Log-28 , 2006, Neurology.

[42]  Catherine E. Lang,et al.  Translating Animal Doses of Task-Specific Training to People With Chronic Stroke in 1-Hour Therapy Sessions: A Proof-of-Concept Study , 2010, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.

[43]  Grant D. Huang,et al.  Robot-assisted therapy for long-term upper-limb impairment after stroke. , 2010, The New England journal of medicine.

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

[45]  M. Levin,et al.  Arm reaching improvements with short-term practice depend on the severity of the motor deficit in stroke , 2003, Experimental Brain Research.