Efficacy of a Hybrid Upper Limb Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation System in Lessening Selected Impairments and Dysfunctions Consequent to Cerebral Damage

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of this study was to test the efficacy of a new computerized neu romuscular electric stimulation system (Handmaster™) in improving selected im pairments and functional measures of patients who survived stroke and traumatic brain injury (TBI).

Methods: Survivors of stroke (n = 13) and TBI (n = 7) with chronic paralysis lasting 6.8 ± 7.8 years (range 1 to 29 years) participated in a home program of elec trical stimulation. The device is a hybrid of a hand-forearm splint that incorporates five surface electrodes and a computerized electrical stimulator. The patterned stimu lation elicits finger flexion and extension, lateral pinch, and grasp of the paralyzed hand. Patients practiced daily for 3.4 ± 0.5 hours over a mean duration of 13.1 ± 6.6 weeks. Assessment included goniometric measurements of wrist and elbow rest ing posture, passive and active joints motion, linear distance of fingers to palm, Ash worth scale, and the ability to hold a 1 kg load in the affected hand. The Frenchay arm test represented hand function.

Results : ANOVA tests and Wilcoxon signed rank test were employed. There were significant improvements (p = 0.01) in elbow, wrist, and fingers posture; Ash worth scale; volitional active elbow flexion (32.5 ± 12.7°); wrist extension (12.7 ± 11.1°) and flexion (9.03 ± 4.5°). Passive wrist extension improved 13.7 ± 3.6°. Thir teen patients (65 percent) had active wrist extension post stimulation compared with only three (15 percent) before study commencement. Partial completion of the Fren chay tasks were observed before stimulation in only three patients compared with partial completion of tasks by nine patients at study conclusion. Post stimulation, 16 of 20 patients were able to hold a 1 kg weight with the NESS system active, com pared with only three patients without it.

Conclusions: Application of the NESS system for three to four hours daily im proves selected impairments and may help to restore partial hand functions of patients with chronic stroke or head injury. Key Words: Chronic—Stroke—Brain injury— Electrical stimulation—Motor recovery.

References

Reding MJ , McDowell FH Focused stroke rehabilitation programs improve outcome. Arch Neurol 1988; 45:700-701.

Indredavik B. , Slordahl SA , Bakke F. , Rokseth R. , Haheim LL Stroke 1997; 28:1861-1866.

Ottenbacher KJ , Jannell S. The results of clinical trials in stroke rehabilitation research. Arch Neurol 1993; 50:37-44.

McCann BC , Culbertson RA Comparison of two systems for stroke rehabilitation in a general hospital . J Am Geriatr Soc 1976; 24:211-216.

Smith ME , Garraway WM , Smith DL , Akhtar AJ Therapy impact on functional outcome in a controlled trial of stroke rehabilitation . Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1982; 63:21-24.

Strand T. , Asplund K. , Eriksson S. , Lithner F. , Wester PO A non-intensive stroke unit reduces functional disability and the need for long-term hospitalization. Stroke 1985; 16:29-34.

Tangeman PT , Banaitis DA , Williams AK Reliabilitation of chronic stroke patients: Changes in functional performance . Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1990; 71:876-880.

Dam M. , Tonin P. , Casson S. , Ermani M. , et al. The effects of long-term rehabilitation therapy on post-stroke hemiplegic patients. Stroke 1993; 24:1186-1191.

Sunderland A. , Tinson DJ , Bradley EL , Fletcher D. , Langton-Hewer R. , Wade DT Enhanced physical therapy improves recovery of arm function after stroke. A randomized controlled trial. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1992; 55:532-535.

10.

Indredavik B. , Bakke F. , Solberg R. , Rokseth R. , Haaheim LL , Holme H. Benefit of a stroke unit: A randomized controlled trial. Stroke 1991; 22:1026-1031.

11.

Taub NA , Wolfe Cda , Richardson E. , Burney Rgn. Predicting the disability of first-time stroke sufferers at 1 year. Stroke 1994; 25:352 357.

12.

Rusin MJ Stroke rehabilitation: A gerophysiologic perspective. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1990; 71:914-922.

13.

Parker VM , Wade DT , Langton-Hewer R. Loss of arm function after stroke: Measurement, frequency, and recovery. Int Rehabil Med 1986; 8:69-73.

14.

Scharfenberger JA , Ill KC Financing of health care for elderly stroke patients. Phys Med Rehabil: State of the Art Reviews 1989; 3:653-658.

15.

Dobkin B. The economic impact of stroke. Neurology 1995 ; 45: S6-S9.

16.

Wood-Dauphinee SL , Williams JI , Shapiro SH Examining outcome measures in a clinical study of stroke. Stroke 1990; 21:731-739.

17.

Gowland G. , deBruin H. , Basmajian JV , et al. Agonist and antagonist activity during voluntary upper-limb movement in patients with stroke. Phys Ther 1992; 72:624-633.

18.

Kraft GH , Fitts SS , Hammond MC Techniques to improve function of the arm and hand in chronic hemiplegia. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1992; 73:220-227.

19.

Baker LL , Yeh C. , Wilson D. , Waters RL Electrical stimulation of wrist and fingers for hemiplegic patients. Phys Ther 1979; 59:1495-1500.

20.

Baker LL , Parker K. , Sanderson D. Neuromuscular electrical stimulation for the head-injured patient. Phys Ther 1983; 63:1967-1974

21.

Baker LL , Parker K. Neuromuscular electrical stimulation of the muscles surrounding the shoulder . Phys Ther 1986; 66:1930-1937.

22.

Merletti R. , Zelaschi F. , Latella D. , et al. A control study of muscle force recovery in hemiparetic patients during treatment with functional electrical stimulation . Scand J Rehab Med 1978; 10:147-154.

23.

Alfieri V. Electrical treatment of spasticity. Scand J Rehab Med 1982; 14:177-182.

24.

Fields RW Electromyographically triggered electric muscle stimulation for chronic hemiplegia . Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1987; 68:407-414.

25.

Bowman BR , Baker LL , Waters RL Positional feedback and electrical stimulation: An automated treatment for the hemiplegic wrist. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1979; 60:497-502.

26.

Cozan CD , Pease WS , Hubble SL Biofeedback and functional electrical stimulation in stroke rehabilitation . Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1988; 69:401-405.

27.

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

28.

Taub E. , Crago JE , Burgio LD , Grooms TE , et al. An operant approach to rehabilitation medicine: Overcoming learned nonuse by shaping. J Exper Analysis of Behavior 1994; 61:281-293.

29.

Lincoln NB , Willis D. , Philips SA , Juby LC , Berman P. Comparison of rehabilitation practice on hospital wards for stroke patients . Stroke 1996; 27:1.8-23.

30.

Wolf SL , Lecraw DE , Barton LA , Jann BB Forced use of hemiplegic upper extremities to reverse the effect of learned nonuse among chronic stroke and head-injured patients. Exper Neurol 1989; 104:125-132.

31.

Bach-y-Rita P. Brain plasticity as a basis of sensory substitution . J Neuro Rehab 1987; 1:67-71.

32.

Triolo R. , Nathan R. , Handa Y. , et al. Challenges to clinical deployment of upper extremity neuroprostheses . J Rehab Research Develop 1996; 33:(2)111-122.

33.

Schuling J. , de Hann R. , Limburg M. , Groenier KH The Frenchay Activities Index. Assessment of functional status in stroke patients. Stroke 1993; 24:1173-1177.

34.

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

35.

Wolf SL , Binder-Macloud SA Electromyographic biofeedback applications to the hemiplegic patient: Changes in upper extremity neuromuscular and functional status. J Am Phys Ther Assoc 1983; 63:1393-1403.

36.

Faghri PD , Rodgers MM , Glaser RM , et al. The effects of functional electrical stimulation on shoulder subluxation, arm function recovery, and shoulder pain in hemiplegic patients . Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1994; 75:73-79.

37.

Kalra L. , Yu G. , Wilson Koo , Roots P. Medical complications during stroke rehabilitation. Stroke 1995; 26:990-994.

38.

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; 75:394-398.