Ipsilesional arm training in severe stroke to improve functional independence (IPSI): phase II protocol

Candice Maenza, Robert L Sainburg, Rini Varghese, Brooke Dexheimer, Marika Demers, Lauri Bishop, Shanie A L Jayasinghe, David A Wagstaff, Carolee Winstein, IPSI Investigative Team, Candice Maenza, Robert L Sainburg, Rini Varghese, Brooke Dexheimer, Marika Demers, Lauri Bishop, Shanie A L Jayasinghe, David A Wagstaff, Carolee Winstein, IPSI Investigative Team

Abstract

Background: We previously characterized hemisphere-specific motor control deficits in the ipsilesional, less-impaired arm of unilaterally lesioned stroke survivors. Our preliminary data indicate these deficits are substantial and functionally limiting in patients with severe paresis.

Methods: We have designed an intervention ("IPSI") to remediate the hemisphere-specific deficits in the ipsilesional arm, using a virtual-reality platform, followed by manipulation training with a variety of real objects, designed to facilitate generalization and transfer to functional behaviors encountered in the natural environment. This is a 2-site (primary site - Penn State College of Medicine, secondary site - University of Southern California), two-group randomized intervention with an experimental group, which receives unilateral training of the ipsilesional arm throughout 3 one-hour sessions per week for 5 weeks, through our Virtual Reality and Manipulation Training (VRMT) protocol. Our control group receives a conventional intervention on the contralesional arm, 3 one-hour sessions per week for 5 weeks, guided by recently released practice guidelines for upper limb rehabilitation in adult stroke. The study aims to include a total of 120 stroke survivors (60 per group) whose stroke was in the territory of the middle cerebral artery (MCA) resulting in severe upper-extremity motor impairments. Outcome measures (Primary: Jebsen-Taylor Hand Function Test, Fugl-Meyer Assessment, Abilhand, Barthel Index) are assessed at five evaluation points: Baseline 1, Baseline 2, immediate post-intervention (primary endpoint), and 3-weeks (short-term retention) and 6-months post-intervention (long-term retention). We hypothesize that both groups will improve performance of the targeted arm, but that the ipsilesional arm remediation group will show greater improvements in functional independence.

Discussion: The results of this study are expected to inform upper limb evaluation and treatment to consider ipsilesional arm function, as part of a comprehensive physical rehabilitation strategy that includes evaluation and remediation of both arms.

Trial registration: This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (Registration ID: NCT03634397 ; date of registration: 08/16/2018).

Keywords: Arm training; Ipsilateral deficits; Ipsilesional deficits; Less-impaired arm; Stroke motor deficits; Stroke rehabilitation; Stroke remediation; Virtual reality training.

Conflict of interest statement

CM, RS, RV, BD, MD, LB, SJ, and DW declare that they have no competing interests. CW serves as a consultant for Enspire DBS Therapy, Inc. and MicroTransponder, Inc; receives royalty payments from Human Kinetics, Inc. (for 6th edition of Motor Control and Learning), and DemosMedical Publishers (for 2nd edition of Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation).

© 2022. The Author(s).

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Study flow diagram from first referral to final follow-up evaluation
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Timeline of study events for each participant
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Kinematic-virtual reality set-up
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Ipsilesional arm therapy session activities for the experimental group
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Contralesional arm therapy sessions for participants randomized to the control group

References

    1. Morris JH, van Wijck F, Joice S, Ogston SA, Cole I, MacWalter RS. A Comparison of Bilateral and Unilateral Upper-Limb Task Training in Early Poststroke Rehabilitation: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2008;89:1237–1245. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2007.11.039.
    1. Stinear C. Prediction of recovery of motor function after stroke. Lancet Neurol. 2010;9:1228–1232. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(10)70247-7.
    1. Mani S, Mutha PK, Przybyla A, Haaland KY, Good DC, Sainburg RL. Contralesional motor deficits after unilateral stroke reflect hemisphere-specific control mechanisms. Brain. 2013;136(Pt 4):1288–1303. doi: 10.1093/brain/aws283.
    1. Sukal TM, Ellis MD, Dewald JPA. Shoulder abduction-induced reductions in reaching work area following hemiparetic stroke: Neuroscientific implications. Exp Brain Res. 2007;183:215–223. doi: 10.1007/s00221-007-1029-6.
    1. Maenza C, Good DC, Winstein CJ, Wagstaff DA, Sainburg RL. Functional Deficits in the Less-Impaired Arm of Stroke Survivors Depend on Hemisphere of Damage and Extent of Paretic Arm Impairment. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2020;34:39–50. doi: 10.1177/1545968319875951.
    1. Wetter S, Poole JL, Haaland KY. Functional implications of ipsilesional motor deficits after unilateral stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;86:776–781. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2004.08.009.
    1. Chestnut C, Haaland KY. Functional Significance of Ipsilesional Motor Deficits After Unilateral Stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2008;89:62–68. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2007.08.125.
    1. Poole JL, Sadek J, Haaland KY. Ipsilateral Deficits in 1-Handed Shoe Tying After Left or Right Hemisphere Stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2009;90:1800–1805. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2009.03.019.
    1. Schaefer SY, Mutha PK, Haaland KY, Sainburg RL. Hemispheric specialization for movement control produces dissociable differences in online corrections after stroke. Cereb Cortex. 2012;22:1407–1419. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhr237.
    1. Metrot J, Froger J, Hauret I, Mottet D, Van Dokkum L, Laffont I. Motor recovery of the ipsilesional upper limb in subacute stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2013;94:2283–2290. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2013.05.024.
    1. Sainburg RL, Maenza C, Winstein C, Good D. Motor lateralization provides a foundation for predicting and treating non-paretic arm motor deficits in stroke. In: Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology. 2016. p. 257–72.
    1. Varghese R, Winstein CJ. Relationship Between Motor Capacity of the Contralesional and Ipsilesional Hand Depends on the Side of Stroke in Chronic Stroke Survivors With Mild-to-Moderate Impairment. Front Neurol. 2020;10:1340. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2019.01340.
    1. Maenza C, Wagstaff DA, Varghese R, Winstein C, Good DC, Sainburg RL. Remedial Training of the Less-Impaired Arm in Chronic Stroke Survivors With Moderate to Severe Upper-Extremity Paresis Improves Functional Independence: A Pilot Study. Front Hum Neurosci. 2021;15:133. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2021.645714.
    1. Winstein CJ, Pohl RS. Effects of unilateral brain damage on the control of goal-directed hand movements. Exp Brain Res. 1995;105:163–174. doi: 10.1007/BF00242191.
    1. Rapin I, Tourk LM, Costa LD. Evaluation of the Purdue Pegboard as a Screening Test for Brain Damage. Dev Med Child Neurol. 1966;8:45–54. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8749.1966.tb08272.x.
    1. Desrosiers J, Bourbonnais D, Bravo G, Roy PM, Guay M. Performance of the “unaffected” upper extremity of elderly stroke patients. Stroke. 1996;27:1564–1570. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.27.9.1564.
    1. Schaefer SY, Haaland KY, Sainburg RL. Hemispheric specialization and functional impact of ipsilesional deficits in movement coordination and accuracy. Neuropsychologia. 2009;47:2953–2966. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2009.06.025.
    1. Mutha PK, Haaland KY, Sainburg RL. The effects of brain lateralization on motor control and adaptation. J Mot Behav. 2012;44:455–469. doi: 10.1080/00222895.2012.747482.
    1. Rose DK, Winstein CJ. The co-ordination of bimanual rapid aiming movements following stroke. Clin Rehabil. 2005;19:452–462. doi: 10.1191/0269215505cr806oa.
    1. York Haaland K, Delaney HD. Motor deficits after left or right hemisphere damage due to stroke or tumor. Neuropsychologia. 1981;19:17–27. doi: 10.1016/0028-3932(81)90040-3.
    1. Sainburg RL, Schaefer S, Bagesteiro LB. Interlimb differences in trajectory and positional control mechanisms. Proc 25th Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc (IEEE Cat No03CH37439). 2003.
    1. Haaland KY, Schaefer SY, Knight RT, Adair J, Magalhaes A, Sadek J, et al. Ipsilesional trajectory control is related to contralesional arm paralysis after left hemisphere damage. Exp Brain Res. 2009.
    1. Coelho CJ, Przybyla A, Yadav V, Sainburg RL. Hemispheric differences in the control of limb dynamics: a link between arm performance asymmetries and arm selection patterns. J Neurophysiol. 2013;109:825–838. doi: 10.1152/jn.00885.2012.
    1. Yadav V, Sainburg RL. Motor lateralization is characterized by a serial hybrid control scheme. Neuroscience. 2011;196:153–167. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2011.08.039.
    1. Duff SV, Sainburg RL. Lateralization of motor adaptation reveals independence in control of trajectory and steady-state position. Exp Brain Res. 2007;179:551–561. doi: 10.1007/s00221-006-0811-1.
    1. Mutha PK, Haaland KY, Sainburg RL. Rethinking Motor Lateralization: Specialized but Complementary Mechanisms for Motor Control of Each Arm. PLoS One. 2013;8:e58582. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0058582.
    1. Schaffer JE, Sarlegna FR, Sainburg RL. A rare case of deafferentation reveals an essential role of proprioception in bilateral coordination. Neuropsychologia. 2021;160:107969.
    1. Przybyla A, Good DC, Sainburg RL. Dynamic dominance varies with handedness: Reduced interlimb asymmetries in left-handers. Exp Brain Res. 2012;216:419–431. doi: 10.1007/s00221-011-2946-y.
    1. Schaefer SY, Haaland KY, Sainburg RL. Ipsilesional motor deficits following stroke reflect hemispheric specializations for movement control. Brain. 2007;130(Pt 8):2146–2158. doi: 10.1093/brain/awm145.
    1. Tretriluxana J, Gordon J, Fisher BE, Winstein CJ. Hemisphere specific impairments in reach-to-grasp control after stroke: Effects of object size. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2009;23:679–691. doi: 10.1177/1545968309332733.
    1. Gresham GE, Duncan PW, Stason WB, Adams HP, Adelman AM, Alexander DN, et al. Post-stroke rehabilitation: Assessment, referral, and patient management. Quick Reference Guide for Clinicians, Number 16 — Penn State. J Pharmacoepidemiol. 1996;5:35–63.
    1. Guide for the Uniform Data Set for Medical Rehabilitation (including the FIM(TM) Instrument). State University of New York at Buffalo. 1997;Version 5.:14214–3007.
    1. Haaland KY, Flaherty D. The different types of limb apraxia errors made by patients with left vs. right hemisphere damage. Brain Cogn. 1984;3:370–84. doi: 10.1016/0278-2626(84)90029-0.
    1. Plummer P, Morris ME, Dunai J. Assessment of Unilateral Neglect. Phys Ther. 2003;83:732–740. doi: 10.1093/PTJ/83.8.732.
    1. Jebsen RH, Taylor N, Trieschmann RB, Trotter MJ, Howard LA. An objective and standardized test of hand function. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1969;50:311–319.
    1. Hackel ME, Wolfe GA, Bang SM, Canfield JS. Changes in hand function in the aging adult as determined by the Jebsen Test of Hand Function. Phys Ther. 1992;72:373–377. doi: 10.1093/ptj/72.5.373.
    1. Fugl Meyer AR, Jaasko L, Leyman I. The post stroke hemiplegic patient. I. A method for evaluation of physical performance. Scand J Rehabil Med. 1975;7:13–31.
    1. Gladstone DJ, Danells CJ, Black SE. The Fugl-Meyer Assessment of Motor Recovery after Stroke: A Critical Review of Its Measurement Properties. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2002;16:232–240. doi: 10.1177/154596802401105171.
    1. MalouinPichardBonneauDurandCorriveau FLCAD. Evaluating motor recovery early after stroke: Comparison of the Fugl-Meyer Assessment and the Motor Assessment Scale. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1994;75:1206–1212. doi: 10.1016/0003-9993(94)90006-X.
    1. Shelton F de NAP, Volpe BT, Reding M. Motor Impairment as a Predictor of Functional Recovery and Guide to Rehabilitation Treatment After Stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2001;15:229–37. doi: 10.1177/154596830101500311.
    1. Dombovy ML, Sandok BA, Basford JR. Rehabilitation for stroke: A review. Stroke. 1986;17:363–369. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.17.3.363.
    1. Hobart JC, Thompson AJ. The five item Barthel index. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2001;71:225–230. doi: 10.1136/jnnp.71.2.225.
    1. Ekstrand E, Lindgren I, Lexell J, Brogårdh C. Test-retest reliability of the ABILHAND questionnaire in persons with chronic stroke. PM R. 2014;6:324–331. doi: 10.1016/j.pmrj.2013.09.015.
    1. Krumlinde-Sundholm L, Eliasson AC. Development of the assisting hand assessment: A Rasch-built measure intended for children with unilateral upper limb impairments. Scand J Occup Ther. 2003;10:16–26. doi: 10.1080/11038120310004529.
    1. Wang TN, Lin KC, Wu CY, Chung CY, Pei YC, Teng YK. Validity, responsiveness, and clinically important difference of the abilhand questionnaire in patients with stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2011;92:1086–1091. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2011.01.020.
    1. Linacre JM, Heinemann AW, Wright BD, Granger CV, Hamilton BB. The structure and stability of the functional independence measure. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1994;75:127–132. doi: 10.1016/0003-9993(94)90384-0.
    1. Hancock NJ, Collins K, Dorer C, Wolf SL, Bayley M, Pomeroy VM. Evidence-based practice ’ on-the-go’: Using ViaTherapy as a tool to enhance clinical decision making in upper limb rehabilitation after stroke, a quality improvement initiative. BMJ Open Qual. 2019;8. 10.1136/bmjoq-2018-000592.

Source: PubMed

Sponsoren und Mitarbeiter

Krankheiten

Drogeninterventionen

3
Abonnieren