Upper limb impairments associated with spasticity in neurological disorders

Cheng-Chi Tsao, Mehdi M Mirbagheri, Cheng-Chi Tsao, Mehdi M Mirbagheri

Abstract

Background: While upper-extremity movement in individuals with neurological disorders such as stroke and spinal cord injury (SCI) has been studied for many years, the effects of spasticity on arm movement have been poorly quantified. The present study is designed to characterize the nature of impaired arm movements associated with spasticity in these two clinical populations. By comparing impaired voluntary movements between these two groups, we will gain a greater understanding of the effects of the type of spasticity on these movements and, potentially a better understanding of the underlying impairment mechanisms.

Methods: We characterized the kinematics and kinetics of rapid arm movement in SCI and neurologically intact subjects and in both the paretic and non-paretic limbs in stroke subjects. The kinematics of rapid elbow extension over the entire range of motion were quantified by measuring movement trajectory and its derivatives; i.e. movement velocity and acceleration. The kinetics were quantified by measuring maximum isometric voluntary contractions of elbow flexors and extensors. The movement smoothness was estimated using two different computational techniques.

Results: Most kinematic and kinetic and movement smoothness parameters changed significantly in paretic as compared to normal arms in stroke subjects (p < 0.003). Surprisingly, there were no significant differences in these parameters between SCI and stroke subjects, except for the movement smoothness (p < or = 0.02). Extension was significantly less smooth in the paretic compared to the non-paretic arm in the stroke group (p < 0.003), whereas it was within the normal range in the SCI group. There was also no significant difference in these parameters between the non-paretic arm in stroke subjects and the normal arm in healthy subjects.

Conclusion: The findings suggest that although the cause and location of injury are different in spastic stroke and SCI subjects, the impairments in arm voluntary movement were similar in the two spastic groups. Our results also suggest that the non-paretic arm in stroke subjects was not distinguishable from the normal, and might therefore be used as an appropriate control for studying movement of the paretic arm.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
The apparatus including the height adjustable chair, and force and position sensors.
Figure 2
Figure 2
A typical movement trajectory of rapid elbow extension generated by a normal and a stroke subject. Normal: A1 Position; B1 Velocity; and C1 Acceleration. Stroke: A2 Position; B2 Velocity; and C2 Acceleration. Circles in B2, C2 represent zero-crossings in the acceleration. MT: movement time, AROM: active range of motion, Vp: peak velocity, Ap: peak acceleration, TVp: the latency to peak velocity, TAp: the latency to peak acceleration.
Figure 3
Figure 3
A Movement trajectories of elbow angular position, velocity and acceleration of the paretic arm (dotted-line) and the non-paretic arm (solid-line) in a typical stroke subject; B Kinematic, kinetic and smoothness parameters which are significantly different between the paretic and non-paretic arms: MT: movement time; Vp: Peak velocity; Ap: peak acceleration; AROM: active range of motion; MVC: isometric muscle strength of elbow extensors; NJS: normalized jerk score; NMU: number of movement unit. Group average ± Standard deviation.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Movement trajectories of elbow angular position, velocity and acceleration of the non-paretic arm (dotted-line) in a typical stroke subject and the normal arm in a typical healthy subject (normal; solid-line).
Figure 5
Figure 5
A Movement trajectories of elbow angular position, velocity, and acceleration of the spastic arm in a typical SCI subject (spastic SCI; dotted-line) and the normal arm in a typical healthy subject (Normal; solid-line); B Kinematic, kinetic and smoothness variables which are significantly different between the spastic SCI and Normal arms: MT: movement time; TVp: latency to peak velocity; Vp: Peak velocity; Ap: peak acceleration; AROM: active range of motion; MVC: isometric muscle strength of elbow extensors. Group average ± Standard deviation.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Movement trajectories of paretic in stroke (dotted-line) and of spastic in SCI (solid-line) arms.

References

    1. Katz RT, Rymer WZ. Spastic hypertonia: Mechanisms and measurement. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1989;70:144–155.
    1. Sehgal N, McGuire JR. Beyond ashworth. Electrophysiologic quantification of spasticity. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am. 1998;9:949–979.
    1. Granat M, Keating JF, Smith AC, Delargy M, Andrews BJ. The use of functional electrical stimulation to assist gait in patients with incomplete spinal cord injury. Disabil Rehabil. 1992;14:93–97.
    1. Ladouceur M, Barbeau H. Functional electrical stimulation-assisted walking for persons with incomplete spinal injuries: Changes in the kinematics and physiological cost of overground walking. Scan J Rehabil Med. 2000;32:72–79. doi: 10.1080/003655000750045587.
    1. Mirbagheri MM, Tsao C, Rymer WZ. Association of abnormal neuromuscular properties with impaired voluntary movement in stroke. In: NCM , editor. Neural Control Movement. Spain ; 2004.
    1. Norman KE, Pepin A, Barbeau H. Effects of drugs on walking after spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord. 1998;36:699–715. doi: 10.1038/sj.sc.3100674.
    1. Yarkony GM, Roth EJ, Cybulski G, Jaeger RJ. Neuromuscular stimulation in spinal cord injury: I: Restoration of functional movement of the extremities. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1992;73:78–86.
    1. Harvey LA, Batty J, Jones R, Crosbie J. Hand function of C6 and C7 tetraplegics 1 - 16 years following injury. Spinal Cord. 2001;39:37–43. doi: 10.1038/sj.sc.3101101.
    1. Laffont I, Briand E, Dizien O, Combeaud M, Bussel B, Revol M, Roby-Brami A. Kinematics of prehension and pointing movements in C6 quadriplegic patients. Spinal Cord. 2000;38:354–362. doi: 10.1038/sj.sc.3100999.
    1. Curt A, Dietz V. Traumatic cervical spinal cord injury: relation between somatosensory evoked potentials, neurological deficit, and hand function. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1996;77:48–53. doi: 10.1016/S0003-9993(96)90219-1.
    1. Fellows SJ, Kaus C, Thilmann AF. Voluntary movement at the elbow in spastic hemiparesis. Ann Neurol. 1994;36:397–407. doi: 10.1002/ana.410360311.
    1. Gowland C, deBruin H, Basmajian JV, Plews N, Burcea I. Agonist and antagonist activity during voluntary upper-limb movement in patients with stroke. Phys Ther. 1992;72:624–633.
    1. Wagner JM, Lang C, Bastian AJ. Relatiohships between reaching deficits and clinical impairments in acute hemiparesis. In: SFN , editor. Society of Neuroscience. USA ; 2004.
    1. Mirbagheri MM, Barbearu H, Kearney RE. Modulation of reflex mechanics with voluntary contraction in spinal cord injured subjects. In: SFN , editor. Society for Neuroscience. USA ; 2001.
    1. Kamper DG, McKenna-Cole AN, Kahn LE, Reinkensmeyer DJ. Alterations in reaching after stroke and their relation to movement direction and impairment severity. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2002;83:702–707. doi: 10.1053/apmr.2002.32446.
    1. Souza AL, Boninger ML, Fitzgerald SG, Shimada SD, Cooper RA, Ambrosio F. Upper limb strength in individuals with spinal cord injury who use manual wheelchairs. J Spinal Cord Med. 2005;28:26–32.
    1. Thomas CK, Zaidner EY, Calancie B, Broton JG, Bigland-Ritchie BR. Muscle weakness, paralysis and atrophy after human cervical spinal cord injury. Exp Neurol. 1997;148:414–423. doi: 10.1006/exnr.1997.6690.
    1. Bohannon RW, Smith MB. Interrater reliability on a modified Ashworth scale of muscle spasticity. Phys Ther. 1987;67:206–207.
    1. Ashworth B. Preliminary trial of carisoprodol in multiple sclerosis. Practitioner. 1964;192:540–542.
    1. Beer RF, Dewald JPA, Rymer WZ. Deficits in the coordination of multijoint arm movements in patients with hemiparesis: evidence for disturbed control of limb dynamics. Exp Brain Res. 2000;131:305–319. doi: 10.1007/s002219900275.
    1. Chang J, Wu T, Wu W, Su F. Kinematical measure for spastic reaching in children with cerebral palsy. Clinical Biomechanics. 2005;20:381–388. doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2004.11.015.
    1. Rohrer B, Fasoli S, Krebs HI, Hughes R, Volpe B, Frontera WR, Stein J, Hogan N. Movement smoothness changes during stroke recovery. J Neurosci. 2002;22:8297–8304.
    1. Tronick EZ, Fetters L, Olson KL, Chen Y. Similar and functionally typical kinematic reaching parameters in 7- and 15- month- old in utero cocaine-exposed and unexposed infants. Dev Psychobiol. 2004;44:168–175. doi: 10.1002/dev.20002.
    1. Kitazawa S, Goto T, Urushihara Y. Quantitative evaluation of reaching movements in cats with and without cerebellar lesions using normalized integral of jerk. In: Mano N, Hamada I, DeLong MR, editor. Role of the cerebellum and basal ganglia in voluntary movement. Amsterdam , Elsevier Science Publishers B.V.; 1993. pp. 11–19.
    1. Jung HY, Yoon JS, Park BS. Recovery of proximal and distal arm weakness in the ipsilateral upper limb after stroke. Neurorehabilitation. 2002;17:153–159.
    1. Kim SH, Pohl PS, Luchies CW, Stylianou AP, Won Y. Ipsilateral deficits of targeted movements after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2003;84:719–724.
    1. Levin MF. Interjoint coordination during pointing movements is disrupted in spastic hemiparesis. Brain. 1996;119:281–293. doi: 10.1093/brain/119.1.281.
    1. Ada L, O'dwyer N, E. O. Relation between spasticity, weakness and contracture of the elbow flexors and upper limb activity after stroke: an observational study. Disabil Rehabil. 2006;28:891–897. doi: 10.1080/09638280500535165.
    1. Hingtgen B, McGuire JR, Wang M, Harris GF. An upper extremity kinematic model for evaluation of hemiparetic stroke. J Biomech. 2006;39:681–688. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2005.01.008.
    1. McCrea PH, Eng JJ. Consequences of increased neuromotor noise for reaching. Exp Brain Res. 2005;162:70–77. doi: 10.1007/s00221-004-2106-8.
    1. Choe MA, An GJ, Lee YK, Im JH, Choi-Kwon S, Heitkemper M. Effect of inactivity and undernutrition after acute ischemic stroke in a rat hindlimb muscle model. Nurs Res. 2004;53:283–292. doi: 10.1097/00006199-200409000-00001.
    1. O'Dwyer NJ, Ada L, Nieilson PD. Spasticity and muscle contracture following stroke. Brain. 1996;119:1737–1749. doi: 10.1093/brain/119.5.1737.
    1. Pandyan AD, Cameron M, Powell J, Scott DJ, Granat MH. Contracture in the post-stroke wrist: a pilot study of its time course of development and its association with upper extremity recovery. Clin Rehabil. 2003;17:88–95. doi: 10.1191/0269215503cr587oa.
    1. Tsao C., Settle, KD, Mirbagheri, MM. Interrelationship between muscle strength and kinematics parameters characterizing impaired voluntary movements in stroke. In: SFN , editor. Society of Neuroscience. USA ; 2004.
    1. Alberts JL, Saling M, Adler CH, Stelmach GE. Disruptions in the reach-to-grasp actions of Parkinson's patients. Exp Brain Res. 2000;134:353–362. doi: 10.1007/s002210000468.
    1. Hoffmann G, Laffont I, Hanneton S, Roby-Brami A. How to extend the elbow with a weak or paralyzed triceps: control of arm kinematics for aiming in C6-C7 quadriplegic patients. Neuroscience. 2006;139:749–765. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2005.12.018.
    1. Koshland GF, Galloway JC, Farley B. Novel muscle patterns for reaching after cervical spinal cord injury: a case for motor redundancy. Exp Brain Res. 2005;164:133–147. doi: 10.1007/s00221-005-2218-9.
    1. Mirbagheri MM, Ladouceur M, Barbeau H, Kearney RE. Intrinsic and reflex stiffness in normal and spastic spinal cord injured subjects. Exp Brain Res. 2001;141:446–459. doi: 10.1007/s00221-001-0901-z.
    1. Pandyan AD, Price CI, Barnes MP, Johnson GR. A biomechanical investigation into the validity of the modified Ashworth Scale as a measure of elbow spasticity. Clin Rehabil. 2003;17:290–293. doi: 10.1191/0269215503cr610oa.
    1. Kumar RT, Pandyan AD, Sharma AK. Biomechanical measurement of post-stroke spasticity. Age Aging. 2006;35:371–375. doi: 10.1093/ageing/afj084.
    1. Lin FM, Sabbahi M. Correlation of spasticity with hyperactive stretch reflex and motor dysfunction in hemiplegia. Arc Phys Med Rehabil. 1999;80:526–530. doi: 10.1016/S0003-9993(99)90193-4.
    1. Mirbagheri MM, Settle K, Harvey R, Rymer WZ. Neuromuscular abnormalities associated with spasticity of upper extremity muscles in hemiparetic stroke. J Neurophysiol. 2007;98:629–637. doi: 10.1152/jn.00049.2007.
    1. Pandyan AD, Johnson GR, Price CI, Curless RH, Barnes MP, Rodgers H. A review of the properties and limitations of the Ashworth and modified Ashworth Scales as measures of spasticity. Clin Rehabil. 1999;13:373–383. doi: 10.1191/026921599677595404.
    1. Bakheit A, Maynard VA, Curnow J, Hudson N, Kodapala S. The relation between Ashworth scale scores and the excitability of the motor neurones in patients with post-stroke muscle spasticity. J Neurol Neruosurg Psychiatry. 2003;74:646–648. doi: 10.1136/jnnp.74.5.646.

Source: PubMed

3
Se inscrever