Background. Research has shown that movement impairments following stroke are typically associated with the limb contralateral to the side of the stroke. Prior studies identified ipsilateral motor declines across a variety of tasks. Objective. Two experiments were conducted to better understand the ipsilateral contributions to organization and execution of proximal upper extremity multisegment aiming movements in persons with right-hemispheric stroke. Methods. Participants performed reciprocal aiming (Experiment 1) and 2-segment aiming movements (Experiment 2) on a digitizing tablet. In both experiments, target size and/or target orientation were manipulated to examine the influence of accuracy constraints on the planning and organization of movements. Results. Kinematic measures, submovement analysis, and harmonicity measures were included in this study. Declines in organization and execution of multisegment movements were found to contribute to performance decrements and slowing in stroke patients. Furthermore, stroke patients were unable to efficiently plan multisegment movements as one functional unit, resulting in discrete movements. Conclusions . Results suggest the importance of considering ipsilateral contributions to the control and organization of targeted aiming movements as well as implications for rehabilitation and recovery.
Haaland K., Harrington D.The role of hemispheres in closed loop movements. Brain Cogn.1989;9:158-180.
2.
Haaland K., Harrington D.Hemispheric asymmetry of movement. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 1996;6:796-800.
3.
Pohl P., Winstein C., Onla-or S.Sensory-motor control in the ipsilesional upper extremity after stroke. Neurorehabilitation.1997;9:57-69.
4.
Desrosiers J. , Bourbonnais D., Bravo G., et al. Performance of the unaffected upper extremity of elderly stroke patients. Stroke.1996;27:1564-1570.
5.
Haaland K., Delaney H.Motor deficits after left or right hemisphere damage due to stroke or tumor . Neuropsychologia.1981;19:17-27.
6.
Yelnick A., Bonan I., Debray M., et al. Changes in the execution of a complex manual task after ipsilateral ischemic cerebral hemisphere stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil.1996;77:806-810.
7.
Sunderland A. , Bowers M., Sluman S., et al. Impaired dexterity of the ipsilateral hand after stroke and the relationship to cognitive deficit. Stroke. 1999;30:949-955.
8.
Hermsdorfer J., Laimgruber K., Kerkhoff G., et al. effects of unilateral brain damage on grip selection, coordination, and kinematics of ipsilesional prehension . Exp Brain Res.1999;128:41-51.
9.
Hermsdofer J. , Ulrich S., Marquardt C., et al. Prehension with the ipsilesional hand after unilateral brain damage. Cortex. 1999 ;35: 139-162.
10.
Haaland K., Harrington D., Yeo R.The effects of task complexity on motor performance in left and right CVA patients. Neuropsychologia.1987;5:783-794.
11.
Haaland KY, Harrington DLLimb-sequencing after left but not right hemisphere damage. Brain Cogn.1994;24:104-122.
12.
Winstein C., Pohl P.Effects of unilateral brain damage on the control of goal-directed hand movements . Exp Brain Res.1995;105:163-174.
13.
Fisk J., Goodale M.The effects of unilateral brain damage on visually guided reaching: hemispheric differences in the nature of the deficit. Exp Brain Res.1988;72:425-435.
14.
Wyke M.Effects of brain lesion on the rapidity of arm movement. Neurology. 1967;17:1113-1120.
15.
Adam J.The effects of objectives and constraints on motor control strategy in reciprocal aiming movements. J Mot Behav. 1992;24(2):173-185.
16.
Bohan M., Longstaff M., Van Gemmert A., et al. Differential effects of target height and width on 2D aiming movement duration and kinematics. Motor Control.2003;7:278-289.
17.
Buchanan J. , Park J., Ryu Y., et al. Discrete and cyclical units of action in a mixed target pair aiming task. Exp Brain Res.2003;150:473-489.
18.
Fitts PMThe information capacity of the human motor system in controlling the amplitude of movement. J Exp Psychol.1954;47:381-391.
19.
Ketcham C., Seidler R., Van Gemmert A, et al. Age related kinematic differences as influenced by task difficulty, target size, and movement amplitude. J Gerontol Psychol Sci Soc Sci.2002;57B: 54-64.
20.
Helsen W., Adam J., Elliot D., et al. One target advantage: a test of the movement integration hypothesis . Hum Move Sci.2001;20: 643-674.
21.
Leis B., Rand M., Van Gemmert A., et al. Movement precues in planning and execution of aiming movements in Parkinson's disease. Exp Neurol.2005;194:393-409.
22.
Rand M., Alberts J., Stelmach G., et al. The influence of movement segment difficulty on movements with two-stroke sequence. Exp Brain Res.1997;115(1):137-146.
23.
Rand M., Stelmach G.Effects of increased stroke number on sequential arm movements in Parkinson's disease subjects. Parkinson Rel Disord.1999 ;5:27-35.
24.
Rand M., Stelmach G.Segment interdependency and difficulty in two-stroke sequences. Exp Brain Res.2000;134:228-236.
25.
Dounskaia N. , Ketcham C., Stelmach G.Commonalities and differences in control of a large set of drawing movements. Exp Brain Res.2002;146:11-25.
26.
Dounskaia N. , Ketcham C., Stelmach G.Influence of biomechanical constraints on horizontal arm movements. Motor Control.2002 ;6:366-387.
27.
Galloway J. , Koshland G.General coordination of shoulder, elbow and wrist dynamics during multijoint arm movements. Exp Brain Res.2002;142:163-180.
28.
Ketcham C., Dounskaia N., Stelmach G.Multijoint movement control: the importance of interactive torques. Prog Brain Res.2004;143:207-218.
29.
Chen R., Gerloff C., Hallet M., et al. Involvement of the ipsilateral motor cortex in finger movements of different complexities. Ann Neurol.1997 ;41:247-254.
30.
Velicki M., Winstein C., Pohl P.Impaired direction and extent specification of aimed arm movements in humans with stroke-related brain damage. Exp Brain Res.2000;130:362-374.
31.
Fisher B., Winstein C., Velicki M.Deficits in compensatory trajectory adjustments after unilateral sensorimotor stroke. Exp Brain Res.2000;132:328-344.
32.
Goodale M., Milner A., Jackson L., et al. Kinematic analysis of limb movements in neuropsychological research: subtle deficits and recovery of function. Can J Psychol. 1990;44:180-195.
33.
Carlton L.Movement control characteristics of aiming responses. Ergonomics.1980;23:1019-1032.
34.
Guiard Y.On Fitts' and Hooke's laws: simple harmonic movement in upper-limb cyclical aiming. Acta Psychol.1993;82:139-159.
35.
Meyer D., Abrams R., Kornblum S., et al. Optimality in human motor performance: ideal control of rapid aimed movements. Psychol Rev.1988;95:340-370.
36.
Bootsma R., Boulard M., Fernandez L., et al. Informational constraints in human precision aiming. Neurosci Lett. 2002;333:141-145.
37.
Buchanan J. , Park J., Shea C.Systematic scaling of target width: dynamics, planning, and feedback. Neurosci Lett. 2004 ;367:317-322.
38.
Mottet D., Guiard Y., Ferrand T., et al. Two-handed performance of a rhythmical Fitts task by individuals and dyads. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2001;27(6):1275-1286.
39.
Folstein M. , Folstein S., McHugh P. “Mini-mental state”. A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res.1975;12(3):189-198.
40.
Webster D.Critical analysis of the disability in Parkinson's disease. Modern Treatment. 1968;5:257-282.
41.
Winstein C. , Grafton S., Pohl P.Motor task difficulty and brain activity: investigation of goal directed reciprocal aiming using positron emission tomography . J Neurophysiol.1997;77:1581-1594.
42.
Harris JE, Eng JJIndividuals with the dominant hand affected following stroke demonstrate less impairment than those with the nondominant hand affected. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2006;20:380-389.
43.
Wagner J., Lang C., Sahrmann S., et al. Relationships between sensorimotor impairments and reaching deficits in acute hemipareis. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2006;20:406-416.
