Training finger individuation with a mechatronic-virtual reality system leads to improved fine motor control post-stroke

Kelly O Thielbar, Thomas J Lord, Heidi C Fischer, Emily C Lazzaro, Kristin C Barth, Mary E Stoykov, Kristen M Triandafilou, Derek G Kamper, Kelly O Thielbar, Thomas J Lord, Heidi C Fischer, Emily C Lazzaro, Kristin C Barth, Mary E Stoykov, Kristen M Triandafilou, Derek G Kamper

Abstract

Background: Dexterous manipulation of the hand, one of the features of human motor control, is often compromised after stroke, to the detriment of basic functions. Despite the importance of independent movement of the digits to activities of daily living, relatively few studies have assessed the impact of specifically targeting individuated movements of the digits on hand rehabilitation. The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of such finger individuation training, by means of a novel mechatronic-virtual reality system, on fine motor control after stroke.

Methods: An actuated virtual keypad (AVK) system was developed in which the impaired hand controls a virtual hand playing a set of keys. Creation of individuated digit movements is assisted by a pneumatically actuated glove, the PneuGlove. A study examining efficacy of the AVK system was subsequently performed. Participants had chronic, moderate hand impairment resulting from a single stroke incurred at least 6 months prior. Each subject underwent 18 hour-long sessions of extensive therapy (3x per week for 6 weeks) targeted at finger individuation. Subjects were randomly divided into two groups: the first group (Keypad: N = 7) utilized the AVK system while the other group (OT: N = 7) received a similarly intensive dose of occupational therapy; both groups worked directly with a licensed occupational therapist. Outcome measures such as the Jebsen-Taylor Hand Function Test (JTHFT), Action research Arm Test (ARAT), Fugl-Meyer Upper Extremity Motor Assessment/Hand subcomponent (FMUE/FMH), grip and pinch strengths were collected at baseline, post-treatment and one-month post-treatment.

Results: While both groups exhibited some signs of change after the training sessions, only the Keypad group displayed statistically significant improvement both for measures of impairment (FMH: p = 0.048) and measures of task performance (JTHFT: p = 0.021). Additionally, the finger individuation index - a measure of finger independence - improved only for the Keypad group after training (p = 0.05) in the subset (Keypad: N = 4; OT: N = 5) of these participants for which it was measured.

Conclusions: Actively assisted individuation therapy comprised of non task-specific modalities, such as can be achieved with virtual platforms like the AVK described here, may prove to be valuable clinical tools for increasing the effectiveness and efficiency of therapy following stroke.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Actuated virtual keypad (AVK) system. User wears the PneuGlove which both measures joint angles through bend sensors and provides assistance to finger extension or resistance to finger flexion through pneumatic actuation. The user controls the virtual hand through the PneuGlove, and thus depression of the keys.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Graphical User Interface (GUI) for the AVK system. Therapist adjusts parameters to grade task difficulty according to subjects’ ability level throughout the session, such as the amount of assistance/resistance pressure provided, the angular thresholds for key stroke, and the digits to be monitored.
Figure 3
Figure 3
The AVK system. A) Key Combination mode—The user must depress the instructed keys within a specified period of time and then release the keys. If unsuccessful, the digits in error are highlighted with red rings at the end of each trial. A score for each trial and a running score are shown on the screen to the user as feedback (not pictured). B) Song Mode—The user is given a series of key combinations in order to play the chosen song. The pictured sequence was for the ring finger (first image) followed by the index finger (middle image) and middle finger (last image) independently. A score for each key press was awarded and tallied for an overall song score (not pictured). Bonus points could be earned for perfect sequential key presses (e.g. Mega Combo).
Figure 4
Figure 4
Change in finger individuation. Values averaged across subjects for each digit for A) AVK B) OT. Error bars represent SE. *Paired t-test: p-value = 0.050 across all digits.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Noninferiority testing of treatment difference (AVK-OT) at one-month follow-up relative to baseline. A) ARAT and B) JTHFT both showing AVK superiority and C) LPS showing noninferiority.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Performance across training sessions on exercises with the AVK system. Success in Key Combination Mode as quantified by the A) Win Ratio and B) Difficulty. Markers indicate mean across subjects for each session. C) Change in performance of Song Mode for a single subject. Comparison of mean song score during the first (dark gray bar) and last session (light gray bar) for a single subject using the same difficulty settings. Error bars indicate SD. *p-value < 0.005.

References

    1. Schieber MH. Individuated finger movements of rhesus monkeys: a means of quantifying the independence of the digits. J Neurophysiol. 1991;65(6):1381–1391.
    1. van Duinen H, Gandevia SC. Constraints for control of the human hand. J Physiol. 2011;589(Pt 23):5583–5593. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.2011.217810.
    1. Penfield W, Boldrey E. Somatic motor and sensory representation in the cerebral cortex of man as studied by electrical stimulation. Brain. 1937;60:389–443. doi: 10.1093/brain/60.4.389.
    1. Rathelot JA, Strick PL. Muscle representation in the macaque motor cortex: an anatomical perspective. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006;103(21):8257–8262. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0602933103.
    1. Porter R, Lemon R. Corticospinal function and voluntary movement. Monographs of the Physiological Society. Oxford; New York: Clarendon Press; Oxford University Press; 1993. p. 428.
    1. Olivier E, Edgley SA, Armand J, Lemon RN. An electrophysiological study of the postnatal development of the corticospinal system in the macaque monkey. J Neurosci. 1997;17(1):267–276.
    1. Lang CE, Schieber MH. Reduced muscle selectivity during individuated finger movements in humans after damage to the motor cortex or corticospinal tract. J Neurophysiol. 2004;91(4):1722–1733. doi: 10.1152/jn.00805.2003.
    1. Raghavan P, Petra E, Krakauer JW, Gordon AM. Patterns of impairment in digit independence after subcortical stroke. J Neurophysiol. 2006;95(1):369–378. doi: 10.1152/jn.00873.2005.
    1. Wenzelburger R, Kopper F, Frenzel A, Stolze H, Klebe S, Brossmann A, Kuhtz-Buschbeck J, Golge M, Illert M, Deuschl G. Hand coordination following capsular stroke. Brain. 2005;128(Pt 1):64–74.
    1. Taheri H, Rowe JB, Gardner D, Chan V, Reinkensmeyer DJ, Wolbrecht ET. Robot-assisted Guitar Hero for finger rehabilitation after stroke. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2012;2012:3911–3917.
    1. Sale P, Lombardi V, Franceschini M. Hand robotics rehabilitation: feasibility and preliminary results of a robotic treatment in patients with hemiparesis. Stroke Res Treat. 2012;2012:820931.
    1. Merians AS, Fluet GG, Qiu Q, Saleh S, Lafond I, Davidow A, Adamovich SV. Robotically facilitated virtual rehabilitation of arm transport integrated with finger movement in persons with hemiparesis. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2011;8:27. doi: 10.1186/1743-0003-8-27.
    1. Lord TJ, Keefe DM, Li Y, Stoykov N, Kamper D. International Conference on Virtual Rehabilitation. Switzerland: Zurich; 2011. Development of a haptic keypad for training finger individuation after stroke.
    1. Simone LK, Sundarrajan N, Luo X, Jia Y, Kamper DG. A low cost instrumented glove for extended monitoring and functional hand assessment. J Neurosci Methods. 2007;160(2):335–348. doi: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2006.09.021.
    1. Gowland C, Stratford P, Ward M, Moreland J, Torresin W, Van Hullenaar S, Sanford J, Barreca S, Vanspall B, Plews N. Measuring physical impairment and disability with the Chedoke-McMaster stroke assessment. Stroke. 1993;24(1):58–63. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.24.1.58.
    1. Stoykov ME, Stojakovich M, Towles JD. An occupational therapy protocol for the investigation of cortical stimulation paired with upper limb training. Program No. 181.5, in 2004 Neuroscience Meeting Planner. San Diego, CA: Society for Neuroscience; 2004.
    1. Law M, Baptiste S, McColl M, Opzoomer A, Polatajko H, Pollock N. The Canadian occupational performance measure: an outcome measure for occupational therapy. Can J Occup Ther. 1990;57(2):82–87. doi: 10.1177/000841749005700207.
    1. Guadagnoli MA, Lee TD. Challenge point: a framework for conceptualizing the effects of various practice conditions in motor learning. J Mot Behav. 2004;36(2):212–224. doi: 10.3200/JMBR.36.2.212-224.
    1. Lyle RC. A performance test for assessment of upper limb function in physical rehabilitation treatment and research. Int J Rehabil Res. 1981;4(4):483–492. doi: 10.1097/00004356-198112000-00001.
    1. Beebe JA, Lang CE. Relationships and responsiveness of six upper extremity function tests during the first six months of recovery after stroke. J Neurol Phys Ther. 2009;33(2):96–103. doi: 10.1097/NPT.0b013e3181a33638.
    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(6):311–319.
    1. Fugl-Meyer AR, Jääskö L, Leyman I, Olsson S, Steglind S. The post-stroke hemiplegic patient. 1. a method for evaluation of physical performance. Scand J Rehabil Med. 1975;7(1):13–31.
    1. Hager-Ross C, Schieber MH. Quantifying the independence of human finger movements: comparisons of digits, hands, and movement frequencies. J Neurosci. 2000;20(22):8542–8550.
    1. Lang CE, Schieber MH. Differential impairment of individuated finger movements in humans after damage to the motor cortex or the corticospinal tract. J Neurophysiol. 2003;90(2):1160–1170. doi: 10.1152/jn.00130.2003.
    1. Walker E, Nowacki AS. Understanding equivalence and noninferiority testing. J Gen Intern Med. 2011;26(2):192–196. doi: 10.1007/s11606-010-1513-8.
    1. Van der Lee JH, De Groot V, Beckerman H, Wagenaar RC, Lankhorst GJ, Bouter LM. The intra- and interrater reliability of the action research arm test: a practical test of upper extremity function in patients with stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2001;82(1):14–19. doi: 10.1053/apmr.2001.18668.
    1. Shelton FD, Volpe BT, Reding M. Motor impairment as a predictor of functional recovery and guide to rehabilitation treatment after stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2001;15(3):229–237. doi: 10.1177/154596830101500311.
    1. Lang CE, Edwards DF, Birkenmeier RL, Dromerick AW. Estimating minimal clinically important differences of upper-extremity measures early after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2008;89(9):1693–1700. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2008.02.022.
    1. Chen HM, Chen CC, Hsueh IP, Huang SL, Hsieh CL. Test-retest reproducibility and smallest real difference of 5 hand function tests in patients with stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2009;23(5):435–440. doi: 10.1177/1545968308331146.
    1. Kamper DG, Cruz EG, Siegel MP. Stereotypical fingertip trajectories during grasp. J Neurophysiol. 2003;90(6):3702–3710. doi: 10.1152/jn.00546.2003.
    1. Hesse S, Werner C, Pohl M, Rueckriem S, Mehrholz J, Lingnau ML. Computerized arm training improves the motor control of the severely affected arm after stroke: a single-blinded randomized trial in two centers. Stroke. 2005;36(9):1960–1966. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.0000177865.37334.ce.
    1. Schaefer SY, Patterson CB, Lang CE. Transfer of training between distinct motor tasks after stroke: implications for task-specific approaches to upper-extremity neurorehabilitation. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2013;27(7):602–612. doi: 10.1177/1545968313481279.
    1. Seo NJ, Fischer HW, Bogey RA, Rymer WZ, Kamper DG. Use of visual force feedback to improve digit force direction during pinch grip in persons with stroke: a pilot study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2011;92(1):24–30. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2010.08.016.

Source: PubMed

3
Iratkozz fel