Effects of Modified Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy on Movement Kinematics and Daily Function in Patients With Stroke: A Kinematic Study of Motor Control Mechanisms

Abstract

Background and Objective. Motor control of the upper extremity during unilateral and bimanual functional tasks and functional change during daily activities were evaluated in patients with stroke treated with modified constraint-induced movement therapy (mCIMT). Methods. In a pre-post randomized, controlled trial, 30 stroke patients received 2 hours of mCIMT or traditional rehabilitation (TR) for 3 weeks. Motor control of the upper extremity was evaluated using kinematic analysis in unilateral and bilateral tasks. Kinematic variables included spatial and temporal movement efficiency and type of movement control (preplanned control, representing well-learned movement, or feedback-guided control). Functional outcomes were evaluated using the Motor Activity Log (MAL) and the Functional Independence Measure (FIM). Results. Patients receiving mCIMT showed more temporally (P = .013) and spatially (P = .011) efficient movement and more preplanned movement control (P = .009) during the bimanual task, and greater gains in FIM (P = .004) and MAL scores (amount of use: P < .0001, and quality of movement: P = .012) than patients in the TR group. Patients receiving mCIMT produced more ballistic/preplanned reaching movement than did patients receiving TR (P = .023) during the unilateral task; but there were no group differences in temporal or spatial efficiency in unilateral task performance. Conclusions. Relative to TR, mCIMT produced a greater improvement in functional performance and motor control. Improvement of motor control after mCIMT was based on improved spatial and temporal efficiency, apparently more salient during bimanual rather than unilateral task performance. This suggests that bilateral task performance should potentially be emphasized in kinematic study of changes in motor control after mCIMT.

Keywords

Cerebrovascular disease Upper extremity Kinematics Rehabilitation Activities of daily living.

References

van Der Lee JH , Wagenaar RC , Lankhorsst GJ , et al. Forced use of upper extremity in chronic stroke patients. Stroke. 1999;30:2369-2375.

Grotta JC , Noser EA , Ro T. , et al. Constraint-induced movement therapy. Stroke . 2004;35(Suppl 1):2699-2701.

Plummer, AC Constraint-induced therapy and the motor learning literature that underpins its application. Phys Ther Rev. 2003;8:143-149

Sunderland A. , Tuke A. Neuroplasticity, learning and recovery after stroke: a critical evaluation of constraint-induced therapy. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2005;15:81-96.

Miltner W. , Bauder H. , Sommer M. , et al. Effects of constraint-induced movement therapy on patients with chronic motor deficits after stroke: a replication. Stroke . 1999;30:586-592.

Page SJ , Sisto S. , Johnston MV , et al. Modified constraint-induced therapy after subacute stroke: a preliminary study. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2002;16:290-295.

Page SJ , Sisto S. , Levine P. , et al. Efficacy of modified constraint-induced movement therapy in chronic stroke: a single-blinded randomized controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004;85: 1377-1381.

Page SJ , Levine P. , Leonard AC Modified constraint-induced therapy in acute stroke: a randomized controlled pilot study. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2005 ;19:27-32.

Bonifer NM , Anderson KM , Arciniegas DB Constraint-induced movement therapy after stroke: efficacy for patients with minimal upper-extremity motor ability. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;86:1867-1873.

10.

Alberts JL , Butler AJ , Wolf SL The effects of constraint-induced therapy on precision grip: a preliminary study. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2004;18:250-258.

11.

Wolf SL , Blanton S. , Baer H. , et al. Repetitive task practice: a critical review of constraint-induced movement therapy in stroke. Neurologist. 2002 ;8:325-338.

12.

Platz T. , Bock S. , Prass K. Reduced skillfulness of arm motor behaviour among motor stroke patients with good clinical recovery: does it indicate reduced automaticity? Can it be improved by unilateral or bilateral training? A kinematic motion analysis study. Neuropsychologia. 2001;39:687-698.

13.

Milner TE A model for the generation of movements requiring endpoint precision. Neuroscience. 1992;49:487-496.

14.

Haaland KY , Prestopnik JL , Knight RT , et al. Hemispheric asymmetries for kinematic and positional aspects of reaching. Brain. 2004;127:1145-1158.

15.

Kamper DG , McKenna-Cole AN , Kahn LE , et al. Alterations in reaching after stroke and their relation to movement direction and impairment severity. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2002;83:702-707.

16.

Ma HI , Trombly CA , Tickle-Degnen L. , et al. Effect of one single auditory cue on movement kinematics in patients with Parkinson's disease. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2004;83:530-536.

17.

Hakim RM , Kelly SJ , Grant-Beuttler M. , et al. Case report: a modified constraint-induced therapy (mCIT) program for the upper extremity of a person with chronic stroke. Physiother Theory Pract. 2005;21:243-256.

18.

Taub E. , Miller NE , Novack TA , et al. Technique to improve chronic motor deficit after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1993; 74:347-354.

19.

Dromerick AW , Edwards DF , Hahn M.

Does the application of constraint-induced movement therapy during acute rehabilitation reduce arm impairment after ischemic stroke?

Stroke. 2000;31: 2984-2988.

20.

Taub E. , Miller NE , Novack TA , et al. Technique to improve chronic motor deficit after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehab. 1993; 74:347-354.

21.

Teng EL , Chui HC The modified Mini-Mental State Exam. J Clin Psychiatry. 1987;48:314-318.

22.

Bohannon R. , Smith M. Interrater reliability of a modified Ashworth scale of muscle spasticity. Phys Ther. 1987 ;67:206-207.

23.

Hamilton BB , Granger CV , Sherwin FS , et al. A uniform national data system for medical rehabilitation. In: Fuhrer MJ , ed. Rehabilitation outcomes: analysis and measurements. Baltimore, MD: Brookes;1987:137-147.

24.

Chau N. , Daler S. , Andre JM , et al. Inter-rater agreement of two functional independence scales: the Functional Independence Measure (FIM) and a subjective uniform continuous scale. Disabil Rehabil. 1994;16:63-71.

25.

Hamilton B. , Laughlin JA , Fiedler RC , et al. Interrater reliability of the 7-level Functional Independence Measure (FIM). Scand J Rehabil Med. 1994;26:115-119.

26.

Dodds TA , Martin DP , Stolov WC , et al. A validation of the Functional Independence Measurement and its performance among rehabilitation inpatients. Arch Phys Med Rehab. 1993;74: 531-536.

27.

Kidd D. , Stewart G. , Baldry J. , et al. The Functional Independence Measure: a comparative validity and reliability study. Disabil Rehabil. 1995 ;17:10-14.

28.

Gosman-Hedstrom G. , Svensson E. Parallel reliability of the Functional Independence Measure and the Barthel ADL index. Disabil Rehabil. 2000;22:702-715.

29.

Stevens JP Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences. 4th ed. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2002.

30.

Rosenthal R. , Rosnow RL Essentials of behavioral research: methods and data analysis 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill ; 1991.

31.

Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1988.

32.

Archambault P. , Pigeon P. , Feldman AG , et al. Recruitment and sequencing of different degrees of freedom during pointing movements involving the trunk in healthy and hemiparetic subjects. Exp Brain Res. 1999 ;126:55-67.

33.

Cauraugh JH , Kim S. Two coupled motor recovery protocols are better than one: electromyogram-triggered neuromuscular stimulation and bilateral movements. Stroke. 2002;33:1589-1594.

34.

Mudie MH , Matyas TA Can simultaneous bilateral movement involve the undamaged hemisphere in reconstruction of neural networks damaged by stroke. Disabil Rehabil. 2000;22:23-37.

35.

Mudie MH , Matyas TA Upper extremity retraining following stroke: effects of bilateral practice . J Neurol Rehabil. 1996;10: 167-184.

36.

Fisk AD , Rogers WA , Cooper BP , et al. Automatic category search and its transfer: aging, type of search, and level of learning. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 1997;52:91-102.