Effects of action observation therapy on upper extremity function, daily activities and motion evoked potential in cerebral infarction patients

Jianming Fu, Ming Zeng, Fang Shen, Yao Cui, Meihong Zhu, Xudong Gu, Ya Sun, Jianming Fu, Ming Zeng, Fang Shen, Yao Cui, Meihong Zhu, Xudong Gu, Ya Sun

Abstract

Background: The aim of this study was to explore the effects of action observation therapy on motor function of upper extremity, activities of daily living, and motion evoked potential in cerebral infarction patients.

Method: Cerebral infarction survivors were randomly assigned to an experimental group (28 patients) or a control group (25 patients). The conventional rehabilitation treatments were applied in both groups, but the experimental group received an additional action observation therapy for 8 weeks (6 times per week, 20 minutes per time). Fugl-Meyer assessment (FMA), Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT), Modified Barthel Index (MBI), and motor evoked potential (MEP) were used to evaluate the upper limb movement function and daily life activity.

Results: There were no significant differences between experiment and control group in the indexes, including FMA, WMFT, and MBI scores, before the intervention. However, after 8 weeks treatments, these indexes were improved significantly. MEP latency and center-motion conduction time (CMCT) decreased from 23.82 ± 2.16 and 11.15 ± 1.68 to 22.69 ± 2.11 and 10.12 ± 1.46 ms. MEP amplitude increased from 0.61 ± 0.22 to 1.25 ± 0.38 mV. A remarkable relationship between the evaluations indexes of MEP and FMA was found.

Conclusions: Combination of motion observation and traditional upper limb rehabilitation treatment technology can significantly elevate the movement function of cerebral infarction patients in subacute seizure phase with upper limb dysfunction, which expanded the application range of motion observation therapy and provided an effective therapy strategy for upper extremities hemiplegia in stroke patients.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow chart of the cases included in this study.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Action observation therapies for participants.
Figure 3
Figure 3
The correlation between FMA scores and MEP latency, and FMA scores and CMCT. CMCT = center-motion conduction time, FMA = Fugl-Meyer assessment, MEP = motion-evoked potential.

References

    1. Cirstea MC, Levin MF. Improvement of arm movement patterns and endpoint control depends on type of feedback during practice in stroke survivors. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2007;21:398–411.
    1. Cacchio A, De BE, De BV, et al. Mirror therapy in complex regional pain syndrome type 1 of the upper limb in stroke patients. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2009;23:792.
    1. Kwakkel G, Kollen BJ, Van der Grond J, et al. Probability of regaining dexterity in the flaccid upper limb: impact of severity of paresis and time since onset in acute stroke. Stroke 2003;34:2181–6.
    1. Spieler JF, Lanoë JL, Amarenco P. Costs of stroke care according to handicap levels and stroke subtypes. Cerebrovasc Dis 2004;17:134–42.
    1. Minichino A, Cadenhead K. Mirror neurons in psychiatric disorders: from neuroception to bio-behavioral system dysregulation. Neuropsychopharmacology 2017;42:366.
    1. Yarmand H, Ashayeri H, Golfam A, et al. The effect of mirror neurons stimulation on syntax development of female Persian autistic children 2016;6:67.
    1. Werf YDVD, Helm EVD, Schoonheim MM, et al. Learning by observation requires an early sleep window. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2009;106:18926–30.
    1. Burns MS. Application of neuroscience to technology in stroke rehabilitation. Top Stroke Rehabil 2008;15:570–9.
    1. Kim GW, Yu HW, Park SH, et al. Can motor evoked potentials be an objective parameter to assess extremity function at the acute or subacute stroke stage? Ann Rehabil Med 2015;39:253–61.
    1. Lee SY, Lim JY, Kang EK, et al. Prediction of good functional recovery after stroke based on combined motor and somatosensory evoked potential findings. J Rehabil Med 2010;42:16–20.
    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.
    1. Fu TS, Wu CY, Lin KC, et al. Psychometric comparison of the shortened Fugl-Meyer Assessment and the streamlined Wolf Motor Function Test in stroke rehabilitation. Clin Rehabil 2012;26:1043–7.
    1. Wolf SL, Catlin PA, Ellis M, et al. Assessing Wolf motor function test as outcome measure for research in patients after stroke 2001;32:1635–9.
    1. Chen HF, Wu CY, Lin KC, et al. Measurement properties of streamlined wolf motor function test in patients at subacute to chronic stages after stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2014;28:839.
    1. Duffy L, Gajree S, Langhorne P, et al. Reliability (inter-rater agreement) of the Barthel Index for Assessment of stroke survivors systematic review and meta-analysis. Stroke 2013;44:462–8.
    1. van Exel NJ, Scholte op Reimer WJ, Koopmanschap MA. Assessment of post-stroke quality of life in cost-effectiveness studies: the usefulness of the Barthel Index and the EuroQoL-5D. Qual Life Res 2004;13:427–33.
    1. Stinear C. Prediction of recovery of motor function after stroke. Lancet Neurol 2010;9:1228–32.
    1. Franceschini M, Agosti M, Cantagallo A, et al. Mirror neurons: action observation treatment as a tool in stroke rehabilitation. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med 2010;46:517–23.
    1. Sale P, Franceschini M. Action observation and mirror neuron network: a tool for motor stroke rehabilitation. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med 2012;48:313–8.
    1. Eunjoo K, Kyeongmi K. Effect of purposeful action observation on upper extremity function in stroke patients. J Phys Ther Sci 2015;27:2867–9.
    1. Ertelt D, Small S, Solodkin A, et al. Action observation has a positive impact on rehabilitation of motor deficits after stroke. NeuroImage 2007;36:T164–73.
    1. Park HJ, Oh DW, Choi JD, et al. Action observation training of community ambulation for improving walking ability of patients with post-stroke hemiparesis: a randomized controlled pilot trial. Clin Rehabil 2016;31:1078–86.
    1. Chen W, Ye Q, Ji X, et al. Mirror neuron system based therapy for aphasia rehabilitation. Front Psychol 2015;6:1665.
    1. Kim J, Lee B, Lee HS, et al. Differences in brain waves of normal persons and stroke patients during action observation and motor imagery. J Phys Ther Sci 2014;26:215–8.
    1. Marangon M, Priftis K, Fedeli M, et al. Lateralization of motor cortex excitability in stroke patients during action observation: a TMS Study. Biomed Res Int 2014;2014:251041.
    1. Liepert J, Greiner J, Dettmers C. Motor excitability changes during action observation in stroke patients. J Rehabil Med 2014;46:400.
    1. Steppan J, Meaders T, Muto M, et al. A metaanalysis of the effectiveness and safety of ozone treatments for herniated lumbar discs. J Vasc Int Radiol 2010;21:534.
    1. Fujiki M, Kobayashi H, Abe T, et al. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for protection against delayed neuronal death induced by transient ischemia. J Neurosurg 2003;99:1063.
    1. Rizzolatti G, Sinigaglia C. The functional role of the parieto-frontal mirror circuit: interpretations and misinterpretations. Nat Rev Neurosci 2010;11:264–74.
    1. Rizzolatti G, Craighero L. The mirror-neuron system. Annu Rev Neurosci 2004;27:169–92.
    1. Iacoboni M, Woods RP, Brass M, et al. Cortical mechanisms of human imitation. Science 1999;286:2526.
    1. Buccino G, Vogt S, Ritzl A, et al. Neural circuits underlying imitation learning of hand actions: an event-related fMRI study. Neuron 2004;42:323–34.
    1. Johansenberg H, Dawes H, Guy C, et al. Correlation between motor improvements and altered fMRI activity after rehabilitative therapy. Brain 2002;125:2731–42.

Source: PubMed

Patrocinadores e Colaboradores

Condições médicas

Intervenções de drogas

3
Se inscrever