Background and Objective. This study investigated the relative effects of distributed constraint-induced therapy (CIT) and bilateral arm training (BAT) on motor performance, daily function, functional use of the affected arm, and quality of life in patients with hemiparetic stroke. Methods. A total of 60 patients were randomized to distributed CIT, BAT, or a control intervention of less specific but active therapy. Each group received intensive training for 2 hours/day, 5 days/week, for 3 weeks. Pretreatment and posttreatment measures included the Fugl—Meyer Assessment (FMA), Functional Independence Measure (FIM), Motor Activity Log (MAL), and Stroke Impact Scale (SIS). The proximal and distal scores of FMA were used to examine separate upper limb (UL) elements of movement. Results . The distributed CIT and BAT groups showed better performance in the overall and the distal part score of the FMA than the control group. The BAT group exhibited greater gains in the proximal part score of the FMA than the distributed CIT and control groups. Enhanced performance was found for the distributed CIT group in the MAL, the subtest of locomotion in the FIM, and certain domains of the SIS (eg, ADL/IADL). Conclusion. BAT may uniquely improve proximal UL motor impairment. In contrast, distributed CIT may produce greater functional gains for the affected UL in subjects with mild to moderate chronic hemiparesis.
Cauraugh JH, Summers JJNeural plasticity and bilateral movements: a rehabilitation approach for chronic stroke. Prog Neurobiol. 2005;5: 309-320.
2.
Hakkennes S. , Keating JLConstraint-induced movement therapy following stroke: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials. Aust J Physiother. 2005;51:221-231.
3.
Bonifer NM, Anderson KM, Arciniegas DBConstraint-induced movement therapy after stroke: efficacy for patients with minimal upper-extremity motor ability. Arch Phys Med Rehabil . 2005;86:1867-1873.
4.
Sawaki L., Butler AJ, Leng X., et al. Constraint-induced movement therapy results in increased motor map area in subjects 3 to 9 months after stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2008;22:505-513.
5.
Wolf SL, Winstein CJ, Miller JP, et al. Effect of constraint-induced movement therapy on upper extremity function 3 to 9 months after stroke. JAMA. 2006;296:2095-2104.
6.
Page SJ, Levine P., Sisto S., Bond Q., Johnston MVStroke patients' and therapists' opinions of constraint-induced movement therapy . Clin Rehabil. 2002;16:55-60.
7.
Dettmers C., Teske U., Hamzei F., Uswatte G., Taub E., Weiller C.Distributed form of constraint-induced movement therapy improves functional outcome and quality of life after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil . 2005;86: 204-209.
8.
Page SJ, Levine P., Leonard A., Szaflarski JP, Kissela BMModified constraint-induced therapy in chronic stroke: results of a single-blinded randomized controlled trial. Phys Ther. 2008 ;88:333-340.
9.
Wu CY, Chen CL, Tsai WC, Lin KC, Chou SHA randomized controlled trial of modified constraint-induced movement therapy for elderly stroke survivors: changes in motor impairment, daily functioning, and quality of life. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2007;88:273-278.
10.
Boake C., Noser E., Ro T., et al. Constraint-induced movement therapy during early stroke rehabilitation . Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2007;21: 14-24.
11.
Wu CY, Lin KC, Chen CL, Chen IH, Hong WHEffects of modified constraint-induced movement therapy on movement kinematics and daily function in patients with stroke: a kinematic study of motor control mechanisms. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2007 ;21:460-466.
12.
Schaechter JD, Kraft E., Hilliard TS, et al. Motor recovery and cortical reorganization after constraint-induced movement therapy in stroke patients: a preliminary study. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2002;16: 326-338.
13.
Whitall J., McCombe Waller S., Silver KH, Macko RFRepetitive bilateral arm training with rhythmic auditory cueing improves motor function in chronic hemiparetic stroke. Stroke. 2000;31:2390-2395.
14.
Summers JJ, Kagerer FA, Garry MI, Hiraga CY, Loftus A., Cauraugh JHBilateral and unilateral movement training on upper limb function in chronic stroke patients: a TMS study. J Neurol Sci. 2007;252:76-82.
15.
Stewart KC, Cauraugh JH, Summers JJBilateral movement training and stroke rehabilitation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Neurol Sci. 2006;244:89-95.
16.
Hesse S., Werner C., Pohl M., Rueckriem S., Mehrholz J., Lingnau MLComputerized arm training improves the motor control of the severely affected arm after stroke: a single-blinded randomized trial in two centers. Stroke. 2005;36:1960-1966.
17.
Luft AR, McCombe Waller S., Whitall J., et al. Repetitive bilateral arm training and motor cortex activation in chronic stroke: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2004;292:1853-1861.
18.
Richards LG, Senesac CR, Davis SB, Woodbury ML, Nadeau SEBilateral arm training with rhythmic auditory cueing in chronic stroke: not always efficacious. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2008;22:180-184.
19.
Desrosiers J. , Bourbonnais D., Corriveau H., Gosselin S., Bravo G.Effectiveness of unilateral and symmetrical bilateral task training for arm during the subacute phase after stroke: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Rehabil. 2005;19:581-593.
20.
Mudie MH, Matyas TACan simultaneous bilateral movement involve the undamaged hemisphere in reconstruction of neural network damaged by stroke? Disabil Rehabil. 2000;22:23-37.
21.
Mudie MH, Matyas TAResponses of the densely hemiplegic upper extremity to bilateral training . Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2001;15: 129-140.
22.
Lewis GN, Byblow WDNeurophysiological and behavioral adaptations to a bilateral training intervention in individuals following stroke. Clin Rehabil. 2004;18:48-59.
23.
Lum PS, Burgar CG, Shor PC, Majumdar M., Van der Loos M.Robot-assisted movement training compared with conventional therapy techniques for the rehabilitation of upper-limb motor function after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2002;83:952-959.
24.
Volpe BT, Lynch D., Rykman-Berland A., et al. Intensive sensorimotor arm training mediated by therapist or robot improves hemiparesis in patients with chronic stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2008;22:305-310.
25.
Whitall J.Stroke rehabilitation research: time to answer more specific questions? Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2004;18:3-8.
26.
McCombe Waller S., Whitall J.Bilateral arm training: why and who benefits?NeuroRehabilitation. 2008;23:29-41.
27.
Wolf SLRevisiting constraint-induced movement therapy: are we too smitten with the mitten? Is all nonuse "learned"? and other quandaries. Phys Ther. 2007;87:1212-1223.
28.
Mudie MH, Matyas TAUpper extremity retraining following stroke: effects of bilateral practice . J Neurol Rehabil. 1996;10:167-184.
29.
Brunnstrom S.Movement Therapy in Hemiplegia. New York: Harper & Row; 1970 .
30.
Taub E.Constraint-induced movement therapy and massed practice [letter to the editor] . Stroke. 2000;31:983.
31.
Teng EL, Chui HCThe modified Mini-Mental State Exam. J Clin Psychiatry. 1987;48:314-318.
32.
Portney LG, Watkins MPFoundations of Clinical Research: Application to Practice. 3rd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall Health; 2009.
33.
Duncan PW, Propst M., Nelson SGReliability of the Fugl-Meyer assessment of sensorimotor recovery following cerebrovascular accident. Phys Ther. 1983;63:1606-1610.
34.
Gladstone D. , Danells C., Black SEThe Fugl-Meyer Assessment of motor recovery after stroke: a critical review of its measurement properties. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2002;16:232-240.
35.
Kidd D., Stewart G., Baldry J., et al. The Functional Independence Measure: a comparative validity and reliability study. Disabil Rehabil. 1995 ;17: 10-14.
36.
Law M.Self-care. In: Van Deusen J, Brunt, D, eds. Assessment in Occupational and Physical Therapy. Philadelphia, PA: W. B. Saunders;1997:421-433.
37.
Sterr A., Elbert T., Berthold I., Kölbel S., Rockstroh B., Taub E.Longer versus shorter daily constraint-induced movement therapy of chronic hemiparesis: an exploratory study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2002;83:1374-1377.
38.
Uswatte G., Taub E., Morris D., Light K., Thompson PAThe Motor Activity Log-28: assessing daily use of the hemiparetic arm after stroke. Neurology. 2006;67:1189-1194.
39.
Duncan PW, Bode RK, Min Lai S., Perera S.; Glycine Antagonist in Neuroprotection Americans Investigators. Rasch analysis of a new stroke-specific outcome scale: the Stroke Impact Scale. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2003;84:950-963.
40.
Cohen J.Statistical PowerAnalysis for the Behavioral Sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1988.
41.
Sabes P.The planning and control of reaching movements. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2000;10:740-746.
42.
McCombe Waller S., Forrester LW, Villagra F., Whitall J.Intracortical inhibition and facilitation with unilateral dominant, unilateral nondominant and bilateral movement tasks in left and right handed adults. J Neurol Sci. 2008;269:96-104.
43.
Stinear JW, Byblow WDDisinhibition in the human motor cortex is enhanced by synchronous upper limb movements. J Physiol. 2002;543: 307-316.
44.
Dobkin BHConfounders in rehabilitation trials of task-oriented training: lessons from the designs of the EXCITE and SCILT multicenter trials. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2007;21:3-13.
45.
Caimmi M., Carda S., Giovanzana C., et al. Using kinematic analysis to evaluate constraint-induced movement therapy in chronic stroke patients. Neurorehabil Neural Repair . 2008;22:31-39.
46.
Wagner JM, Rhodes JA, Patten C.Reproducibility and minimal detectable change of three-dimensional kinematic analysis of reaching tasks in people with hemiparesis after stroke. Phys Ther. 2008;88:652-663.
47.
Uswatte G., Giuliani C., Winstein C., Zeringue A., Hobbs L., Wolf SLValidity of accelerometry for monitoring real-world arm activity in patients with subacute stroke: evidence from the extremity constraint-induced therapy evaluation trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2006 ;87:1340-1345.
