Objective: To compare the relative strength of different muscle groups of the paretic upper limb and assess the relationship with motor performance.
Design: Descriptive study.
Setting: Secondary care rehabilitation centre.
Subjects: A convenience sample of 13 chronic hemiparetic stroke subjects.
Main outcome measures: The maximal active torques of fivemuscle groups were measured in both upper limbs (UL) and converted into relative strength (paretic/nonparetic). The UL function was assessed using the Box and Block Test, the Finger-to-Nose Test, the Fugl-Meyer Test and the TEMPA (Test Evaluant les Membres supérieurs des Personnes Agées).
Results: The Friedman two-way analysis of variance shows a significant difference across the relative strength of the different muscle groups (p = 0.017), but subsequent multiple comparisons indicate a significant difference between handgrip and elbow extension only (relative strength of 0.52 ± 0.27 and 0.73 ± 0.23 respectively). However, data show the presence of large intra-subject imbalances between muscle groups. The relative forces for shoulder flexion and handgrip are the best predictors of the UL function, the higher Spearman's rho correlation coefficients for each clinical test ranging from 0.70 to 0.81.
Conclusions: These results do not confirm classical clinical teaching regarding the distribution of weakness following stroke (e.g., proximal to distal gradient; extensors more affected than flexors) but support the hypothesis that strength is related to the function of the paretic upper limb.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Gresham GE, Duncan PW, Adams HP et al. Post-stroke rehabilitation, Clinical Practice Guideline, No. 16. AHCPR Publication No. 95–0662. Rockville, MD: US Department of Health and Human Services, 1995.
2.
Burke D. Spasticity as an adaptation to pyramidal tract injury. Adv Neurol1988; 47: 401–423.
3.
Bourbonnais D, Vanden Noven S. Weakness in patients with hemiparesis. Am J Occup Ther1989; 43: 313–319.
4.
Craik, RL. Abnormalities of motor behavior. In: Contemporary management of motor control problems: Proceedings of the II Step Conference; 1990 July 6–13; Norman, OK, USA. APTA's Neurologic Section and Section on Pediatrics. Alexandria, VA: Foundation for Physical Therapy, 1991: 155–165.
5.
Keshner EA. How theoretical framework biases evaluation and treatment. Contemporary management of motor control problems: Proceedings of the II Step Conference; 1990 July 6–13; Norman, OK, USA. APTA's Neurologic Section and Section on Pediatrics. Alexandria, VA: Foundation for Physical Therapy: 37–48.
6.
Gillen G, Burkhardt A. Stroke rehabilitation: a function-based approach. St Louis, MO: CV Mosby, 1998.
7.
Bohannon RW. Relationship between static strength and various other measures in hemiparetic stroke patients. Int Rehabil Med1987; 8: 125–128.
8.
Bohannon RW. Determinants of transfer capacity in patients with hemiparesis. Physiother Can1988; 40: 236–239.
9.
Bohannon RW. Strength deficits also predict gait performance in patients with stroke. Percept Motor Skills1991; 173: 146-146.
10.
Bohannon RW. Standing balance, lower extremity muscle strength, and walking performance of patients referred for physical therapy. Percept Motor Skills1995; 80: 379–385.
11.
Bohannon RW, Andrews AW. Correlation of knee extensor muscle torque and spasticity with gait speed in patients with stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil1990; 71: 330–333.
12.
Hamrin E, Eklund G, Hillgren AK, Borges O, Hall J, Hellstrom O. Muscle strength and balance in post-stroke patients. Ups J Med Sci1982; 87: 11–26. Clinical messages
13.
Nakamaru R, Watanabe S, Handa, T, Morohashi, I. The relationship between walking speed and muscle strength for knee extension in hemiparetic stroke patients. Tohoku J Exp Med1988; 154: 111–113.
14.
Suzuki K, Nakamaru R, Yamada Y, Handa T. Determinants of maximum walking speed in hemiparetic stroke patients. Tohoku J Exp Med1990; 162: 337–344.
15.
Boissy P, Bourbonnais D, Carlotti MM, Gravel D, Arsenault AB. Maximal grip force in chronic stroke subjects and its relationship to global upper extremity function. Clin Rehabil1999; 13: 354–362.
16.
Heller A, Wade DT, Wood VA, Sunderland A, Hewer RL, Ward E. Arm function after stroke: measurement and recovery over the first three months. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry1987; 50: 714–719.
17.
Sunderland A, Tinson D, Bradley L, Hewer RL. Arm function after stroke. An evaluation of grip strength as a measure of recovery and a prognostic indicator. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry1989; 52: 1267–1272.
18.
Bohannon RW, Warren ME, Cogman KA. Motor variables correlated with the hand-to-mouth maneuver in stroke patients. Arch Phys Med Rehabil1991; 72: 682–684.
19.
Andrews AW, Bohannon RW. Distribution of muscle strength impairments following stroke. Clin Rehabil2000; 14: 79–87.
20.
Colebatch JG, Gandevia SC. The distribution of muscular weakness in upper motor neuron lesions affecting the arm. Brain1989; 112: 749–763.
21.
Bohannon RW, Smith MB. Assessment of strength deficits in eight paretic upper extremity muscle groups of stroke patients with hemiplegia. Phys Ther1987, 67: 522–525.
22.
Ada L, O'Dwyer N, Green J, Yeo W, Neilson P. The nature of the loss of strength and dexterity in the upper limb following stroke. Hum Mov Sci1996; 15: 671–687.
23.
Dewald JPA, Beer RF. Abnormal joint torque pattern in the paretic upper limb of subjects with hemiparesis. Muscle Nerve2001; 24: 273–283.
24.
Bohannon RW, Andrews AW. Relationship between impairments in strength of limb actions following stroke.Percept Motor Skills1998; 87: 1327–1330.
25.
Gowland C, Stratford P, Ward Met al. Measuring physical impairment and disability with the Chedoke-McMaster Stroke Assessment. Stroke1993; 24: 58–63.
26.
Hébert R, Bravo G, Girouard D. Validation de l'adaptation française du Modified Mini-Mental State (3MS). La revue de gériatrie1992; 17: 443–450.
27.
Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR. ‘Mini-mental State’: a practical method for grading the cognitive state of patient for the clinician. J Psychiat Res1975; 12: 189–198.
28.
Gauthier L, Dehaut F, Joanette Y. The Bell Test: A quantitative and qualitative test for visual neglect. Int J Clin Neuropsychol1989; 11: 49–54.
29.
Desrosiers J, Bravo G, Hebert R, Dutil E, Mercier L. Validation of the Box and Block Test as a measure of dexterity of elderly people: reliability, validity, and norms studies. Arch Phys Med Rehabil1994; 75: 751–755.
30.
Mathiowetz V, Volland G, Kashman N, Weber K. Adult norms for the Box and Block Test of manual dexterity. Am J Occup Ther1985; 39: 386–391.
31.
Desrosiers J, Hebert R, Bravo G, Dutil E.Upper-extremity motor co-ordination of healthy elderly people. Age Ageing1995; 24: 108–112.
32.
Duncan PW, Propst M, Nelson SG. Reliability of the Fugl-Meyer assessment of sensorimotor recovery following cerebrovascular accident. Phys Ther1983; 63: 1606–1610.
33.
Fugl-Meyer A, Jääskö L, Leyman I, Olsson I, Steglind S. The post-stroke hemiplegic patient. 1. A method for evaluation of physical performance. Scand J Rehabil Med1975; 7: 13–31.
34.
Fugl-Meyer AR. Assessment of motor function in hemiplegic patients. In: Buerger AA, Tobis JS eds. Neurophysiologic aspects of rehabilitation medicine.Springfield: Thomas, 1976: 231–250.
35.
Desrosiers J, Hébert R, Dutil E, Bravo G. Development and reliability of an upper extremity function test for the elderly: the TEMPA. Can J Occup Ther1993; 60: 9–16.
36.
Desrosiers J, Hébert R, Dutil E, Bravo G, Mercier L. Validity of a measurement instrument for upper extremity performance: the TEMPA. Occup Ther J Res1994; 14: 267–281.
37.
Boissy P, Bourbonnais D, Gravel D, Arsenault AB, Leblanc M. A static dynamometer measuring simultaneous torques exerted at the upper limb. IEEE Trans Rehabil Eng1998; 6: 309–315.
38.
Bohannon RW, Andrews AW. Limb muscle strength is impaired bilaterally after stroke. J Phys Ther Sci1995; 7: 1–7.
39.
Marque PH, Felez A, Puel Met al. Impairment and recovery of left motor function in patients with right hemiplegia. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry1997; 62: 77–81.
40.
Carr J, Shepherd R. Neurological rehabilitation: optimizing motor performance. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann, 1998.
