Recovery of kinematic arm function in well-performing people with subacute stroke: a longitudinal cohort study

Gyrd Thrane, Margit Alt Murphy, Katharina Stibrant Sunnerhagen, Gyrd Thrane, Margit Alt Murphy, Katharina Stibrant Sunnerhagen

Abstract

Background: Most motor function improvements in people who have experienced strokes occur within the first 3 months. However, individuals showing complete or nearly complete arm function recovery, as assessed using clinical scales, still show certain movement kinematic deficits at 3 months, post-stroke. This study evaluated the changes in upper extremity kinematics, in individuals demonstrating minor clinical motor impairments, 3-12 months post-stroke, and also examined the association between kinematics and the subjects's self-perceived hand abilities during the chronic stage, 12 months post-stroke.

Methods: Forty-two subjects recovering from strokes and having Fugl-Meyer upper extremity motor assessment scores ≥60 were included from the Stroke Arm Longitudinal Study at the University of Gothenburg (SALGOT). Kinematic analyses of a drinking task, performed 3, 6, and 12 months post-stroke, were compared with kinematic analyses performed in 35 healthy controls. The Stroke Impact Scale-Hand domain was evaluated at the 12-month follow-up.

Results: There were no significant changes in kinematic performance between 3 and 12 months, post-stroke. The patients recovering from stroke showed lower peak elbow extension velocities, and increased shoulder abduction and trunk displacement during drinking than did healthy controls, at all time points. At 12 months, post-stroke, better self-perceived arm functions correlated with improved trunk displacements, movement times, movement units, and time to peak velocity percentages.

Conclusion: Kinematic movement deficits, observed at 3 months post-stroke, remained unchanged at 12 months. Movement kinematics were associated with the patient's self-perceived ability to use their more affected hand.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials: NCT01115348 .

Keywords: Kinematics; Motor impairment; Movement analysis; Recovery; Stroke; Upper extremity.

Conflict of interest statement

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The study was approved by the Regional Ethics Committee of Gothenburg (registration number 225/08, 318–04); written informed consent was obtained from the participants.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Study inclusion process and the samples taken for analysis
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Change of endpoint variables between 3 and 12 months in post-stroke patients compared with healthy controls
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Changes of the elbow, shoulder, and trunk variables between 3 and 12 months in post-stroke patients compared to healthy controls

References

    1. Lawrence ES, Coshall C, Dundas R, Stewart J, Rudd AG, Howard R, Wolfe CD. Estimates of the prevalence of acute stroke impairments and disability in a multiethnic population. Stroke. 2001;32(6):1279–1284. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.32.6.1279.
    1. Persson HC, Parziali M, Danielsson A, Sunnerhagen KS. Outcome and upper extremity function within 72 hours after first occasion of stroke in an unselected population at a stroke unit. A part of the SALGOT study. BMC Neurol. 2012;12:162. doi: 10.1186/1471-2377-12-162.
    1. Nakayama H, Jorgensen HS, Raaschou HO, Olsen TS. Recovery of upper extremity function in stroke patients: the Copenhagen stroke study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1994;75(4):394–398. doi: 10.1016/0003-9993(94)90161-9.
    1. Hendricks HT, Van LJ, Geurts AC, Zwarts MJ. Motor recovery after stroke: a systematic review of the literature. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2002;83(11):1629–1637. doi: 10.1053/apmr.2002.35473.
    1. Verheyden G, Nieuwboer A, De WL, Thijs V, Dobbelaere J, Devos H, Severijns D, Vanbeveren S, De WW. Time course of trunk, arm, leg, and functional recovery after ischemic stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2008;22(2):173–179. doi: 10.1177/1545968307305456.
    1. Dobkin BH, Carmichael ST. The specific requirements of neural repair trials for stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2016;30(5):470–478. doi: 10.1177/1545968315604400.
    1. Lo AC, Guarino PD, Richards LG, Haselkorn JK, Wittenberg GF, Federman DG, Ringer RJ, Wagner TH, Krebs HI, Volpe BT, et al. Robot-assisted therapy for long-term upper-limb impairment after stroke. N Engl J Med. 2010;362(19):1772–1783. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0911341.
    1. Wolf SL, Winstein CJ, Miller JP, Taub E, Uswatte G, Morris D, Giuliani C, Light KE, Nichols-Larsen D. Effect of constraint-induced movement therapy on upper extremity function 3 to 9 months after stroke: the EXCITE randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2006;296(17):2095–2104. doi: 10.1001/jama.296.17.2095.
    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(3):232–240. doi: 10.1177/154596802401105171.
    1. Stewart JC, Gordon J, Winstein CJ. Control of reach extent with the paretic and nonparetic arms after unilateral sensorimotor stroke: kinematic differences based on side of brain damage. Exp Brain Res. 2014;232(7):2407–2419. doi: 10.1007/s00221-014-3938-5.
    1. Beer RF, Dewald JP, Dawson ML, Rymer WZ. Target-dependent differences between free and constrained arm movements in chronic hemiparesis. Exp Brain Res. 2004;156(4):458–470. doi: 10.1007/s00221-003-1807-8.
    1. Alt Murphy M, Willen C, Sunnerhagen KS. Kinematic variables quantifying upper-extremity performance after stroke during reaching and drinking from a glass. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2011;25(1):71–80. doi: 10.1177/1545968310370748.
    1. Cirstea MC, Mitnitski AB, Feldman AG, Levin MF. Interjoint coordination dynamics during reaching in stroke. Exp Brain Res. 2003;151(3):289–300. doi: 10.1007/s00221-003-1438-0.
    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(5):702–707. doi: 10.1053/apmr.2002.32446.
    1. Shumway-Cook A, Woollacott MH. PART IV reach, grasp, and manipulation. In: Motor control Translating research into clinical practice. 5th ed: Walter Kluwer, Philadelphia; 2016.
    1. McCrea PH, Eng JJ, Hodgson AJ. Biomechanics of reaching: clinical implications for individuals with acquired brain injury. Disabil Rehabil. 2002;24(10):534–541. doi: 10.1080/09638280110115393.
    1. Thielman GT, Dean CM, Gentile AM. Rehabilitation of reaching after stroke: task-related training versus progressive resistive exercise. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004;85(10):1613–1618. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2004.01.028.
    1. Roby-Brami A, Feydy A, Combeaud M, Biryukova EV, Bussel B, Levin MF. Motor compensation and recovery for reaching in stroke patients. Acta Neurol Scand. 2003;107(5):369–381. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-0404.2003.00021.x.
    1. Cirstea MC, Levin MF. Compensatory strategies for reaching in stroke. Brain. 2000;123(5):940–953. doi: 10.1093/brain/123.5.940.
    1. Roby-Brami A, Fuchs S, Mokhtari M, Bussel B. Reaching and grasping strategies in hemiparetic patients. Mot Control. 1997;1:72):91.
    1. Mandon L, Boudarham J, Robertson J, Bensmail D, Roche N, Roby-Brami A. Faster reaching in chronic spastic stroke patients comes at the expense of arm-trunk coordination. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2016;30(3):209–220. doi: 10.1177/1545968315591704.
    1. Dewald JP, Pope PS, Given JD, Buchanan TS, Rymer WZ. Abnormal muscle coactivation patterns during isometric torque generation at the elbow and shoulder in hemiparetic subjects. Brain. 1995;118(Pt 2):495–510. doi: 10.1093/brain/118.2.495.
    1. Roh J, Rymer WZ, Perreault EJ, Yoo SB, Beer RF. Alterations in upper limb muscle synergy structure in chronic stroke survivors. J Neurophysiol. 2013;109(3):768. doi: 10.1152/jn.00670.2012.
    1. Thrane G, Sunnerhagen KS, Persson HC, Opheim A, Alt Murphy M. Kinematic upper extremity performance in people with near or fully recovered sensorimotor function after stroke. Physiotherapy theory and practice. 2018. 10.1080/09593985.2018.1458929.
    1. Persson HC, Opheim A, Lundgren-Nilsson Å, Alt Murphy M, Danielsson A, Sunnerhagen KS. Upper extremity recovery after ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke: part of the SALGOT study. Eur Stroke J. 2016;1(4):310–319. doi: 10.1177/2396987316672809.
    1. Michaelsen SM, Dannenbaum R, Levin MF. Task-specific training with trunk restraint on arm recovery in stroke: randomized control trial. Stroke. 2006;37(1):186–192. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.0000196940.20446.c9.
    1. Wu CY, Chen CL, Tang SF, Lin KC, Huang YY. Kinematic and clinical analyses of upper-extremity movements after constraint-induced movement therapy in patients with stroke: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2007;88(8):964–970. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2007.05.012.
    1. Alt Murphy M, Willen C, Sunnerhagen KS. Movement kinematics during a drinking task are associated with the activity capacity level after stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2012;26(9):1106–1115. doi: 10.1177/1545968312448234.
    1. Barkelius K, Johansson A, Korm K, Lindmark B. Reliabilitet-och validitetsprövning av Motor assessment Scale enligt Uppsala Akademiska sjukhus-95. Nord Fysioter. 1997;1:121.
    1. Alt Murphy M, Persson HC, Danielsson A, Broeren J, Lundgren-Nilsson A, Sunnerhagen KS. SALGOT--stroke arm longitudinal study at the university of Gothenburg, prospective cohort study protocol. BMC neurology. 2011;11:56. doi: 10.1186/1471-2377-11-56.
    1. Alt Murphy M, Sunnerhagen KS, Johnels B, Willen C. Three-dimensional kinematic motion analysis of a daily activity drinking from a glass: a pilot study. Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation. 2006;3:18. doi: 10.1186/1743-0003-3-18.
    1. Fugl-Meyer AR, Jaasko 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. Duncan PW, Wallace D, Lai SM, Johnson D, Embretson S, Laster LJ. The stroke impact scale version 2.0. Evaluation of reliability, validity, and sensitivity to change. Stroke. 1999;30(10):2131–2140. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.30.10.2131.
    1. R Core Team . In., R version 3.4.2 (2017-09-28) – “short summer” edn: R Fondation for statistical Computing. 2017. A language and environment for statistical computing.
    1. Bates D, Mächler M, Bolker B, Walker S. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. 2015. 2015;67(1):48.
    1. West BT. Linear mixed models. In: Linear Mixed Models. Edn: Chapman and Hall/CRC; 2006. p. 9–49.
    1. Hollander M, Wolfe DA. Nonparametric statistical methods. New York: Wiley; 1973.
    1. Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y. Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J R Stat Soc Ser B Methodol. 1995;57(1):289–300.
    1. Green P, MacLeod CJ. SIMR: an R package for power analysis of generalized linear mixed models by simulation. Methods Ecol Evol. 2016;7(4):493–498. doi: 10.1111/2041-210X.12504.
    1. van Kordelaar J, van Wegen E, Kwakkel G. Impact of time on quality of motor control of the paretic upper limb after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2014;95(2):338–344. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2013.10.006.
    1. van Dokkum L, Hauret I, Mottet D, Froger J, Metrot J, Laffont I. The contribution of kinematics in the assessment of upper limb motor recovery early after stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2014;28(1):4–12. doi: 10.1177/1545968313498514.
    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(11):2283–2290. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2013.05.024.
    1. Reisman DS, Scholz JP. Aspects of joint coordination are preserved during pointing in persons with post-stroke hemiparesis. Brain. 2003;126(Pt 11):2510–2527. doi: 10.1093/brain/awg246.
    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(2):215–223. doi: 10.1007/s00221-007-1029-6.
    1. Levin MF. Interjoint coordination during pointing movements is disrupted in spastic hemiparesis. Brain. 1996;119(Pt 1):281–293. doi: 10.1093/brain/119.1.281.
    1. Levin MF, Kleim JA, Wolf SL. What do motor “recovery” and “compensation” mean in patients following stroke? Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2009;23(4):313–319. doi: 10.1177/1545968308328727.
    1. DeJong SL, Schaefer SY, Lang CE. Need for speed: better movement quality during faster task performance after stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2012;26(4):362–373. doi: 10.1177/1545968311425926.
    1. Massie CL, Malcolm MP. Instructions emphasizing speed improves hemiparetic arm kinematics during reaching in stroke. NeuroRehabilitation. 2012;30(4):341–350.
    1. Robertson JV, Roby-Brami A. The trunk as a part of the kinematic chain for reaching movements in healthy subjects and hemiparetic patients. Brain Res. 2011;1382:137–146. doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2011.01.043.
    1. Palmer E, Ashby P. Corticospinal projections to upper limb motoneurones in humans. J Physiol. 1992;448:397–412. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.1992.sp019048.
    1. Ferbert A, Caramia D, Priori A, Bertolasi L, Rothwell JC. Cortical projection to erector spinae muscles in man as assessed by focal transcranial magnetic stimulation. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1992;85(6):382–387. doi: 10.1016/0168-5597(92)90051-C.
    1. Taub E, Uswatte G, Mark VW, Morris DM. The learned nonuse phenomenon: implications for rehabilitation. Europa medicophysica. 2006;42(3):241–256.
    1. Maslow AH. Toward a psychology of being: D. Van Norstrand Company, inc; 1968.
    1. Wu CY, Wong MK, Lin KC, Chen HC. Effects of task goal and personal preference on seated reaching kinematics after stroke. Stroke. 2001;32(1):70–76. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.32.1.70.

Source: PubMed

Patrocinadores e Colaboradores

Condições médicas

Intervenções de drogas

3
Se inscrever