Rolling to the nonplegic side: influence of teaching and limb strength in hemiplegic stroke patients

Abstract

This study was undertaken to determine in patients with hemiplegia; (1) the influence of patient teaching on independence in rolling to the nonplegic side; and (2) the relationship between limb muscle strength and independence in rolling. Twenty patients who had experienced cerebrovascular accidents were studied. Their capacity to roll to the nonplegic side before, immediately after, and five minutes after instruction was measured. Also measured, but with a hand-held dynamometer, was the static strength of seven muscle groups of each extremity. The mean strength of each extremity's muscle groups was calculated and normalized against (divided by) body weight. Correlations were calculated between normalized strength scores and rolling capacity. The Cohran Q test demonstrated that the proportion of subjects rolling independently was significantly different before and after teaching. Rolling capacity during every trial was significantly correlated with the static strength of the limbs of the nonparetic side. The results suggest that teaching may be beneficial for increasing patient independence in rolling, but that such capacity is not independent of the patient's strength.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bobath B. Adult hemiplegia: evaluation and treatment, second edition. London: William Heinemann Medical Books Ltd, 1978: 84-86.

Carr JH , Shepherd RB A motor relearning program for stroke. Rockville, MD: Aspen Systems Corp, 1983: 75-76.

Charness A. Stroke/head injury. A guide to functional outcomes in physical therapy management . Rockville, MD: Aspen Systems Corp , 1986: 250.

Todd JM , Davies PM Hemiplegia II. In: Cash J ed, Neurology for physiotherapists. Philadelphia, PA: JB Lippincott, 1977: 308-309.

Jonstone M. Home care for the stroke patients. New York, NY: Churchill Livingstone, 1980: 76-77.

Harmin E. One year after stroke: a follow-up of an experimental study. Scand J Rehabil Med 1982; 14: 111-16.

Lehmann JF , Delateur BJ , Fowler RS et al. Stroke: does rehabilitation affect outcome? Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1975; 56: 375-82.

Smith DS , Goldenberg E. , Ashburn A. et al. Remedial therapy after stroke: a randomized controlled trial . Br Med J 1981; 282: 517-20.

Carr JH , Shepherd RB , Gordon J. et al. Movement science foundations for physical therapy in rehabilitation . Rockville, MD: Aspen Publishers Inc., 1987.

10.

Bohannon RW , Smith MB Assessment of strength deficits in eight upper extremity muscle groups of stroke patients with hemiplegia. Phys Ther 1987; 67: 522-25.

11.

Bohannon RW Strength of lower limb related to gait velocity and cadence in stroke patients. Physiotherapy Canada 1986; 38: 204-206.

12.

Bohannon RW Test-retest reliability of hand-held dynamometry during a single session of strength assessment. Phys Ther 1986; 66: 206-209.

13.

Bohannon RW , Andrews AW Interrater reliability of hand-held dynamometry . Phys Ther 1987; 67: 931-33.

14.

Sharp VF Statistics for the social sciences. Boston, MA: Little, Brown and Co, 1979:199-205.

15.

Edwards AL An introduction to linear regression and correlation, second edition. New York, NY: WH Freeman and Co, 1976: 54-58.