Measuring Habitual Arm Use Post-stroke With a Bilateral Time-Constrained Reaching Task

Hemispheric Differences in Self-evaluation Errors of Upper Extremity Movement in Patients with Chronic Stroke

OBJECTIVE

There is growing evidence that the side of brain lesions results in distinct upper extremity deficits in motor control, movement behavior, and emotional and cognitive function poststroke. We investigated self-evaluation errors, which are the differences in scores between patient self-evaluation and clinician evaluations, and compared patients with left hemisphere damage (LHD) and right hemisphere damage (RHD) poststroke.

METHOD

Twenty-eight patients with chronic stroke (LHD = 16) performed the actual amount of the test twice with a one-week interval. We videotaped the participants' movements, and participants with stroke and evaluators graded the quality of movement scores by watching video recordings.

RESULTS

Self-evaluation errors were significantly lower in patients with LHD than in those with RHD (t = 2.350, p = .019). Interestingly, this error did not change after the clinician provided the correct score as feedback. Chi-squared analysis revealed that more patients with LHD underestimated their movements (χ² = 9.049, p = .002), while more patients with RHD overestimated (χ² = 7.429, p = .006) in the send evaluation. Furthermore, there were no correlations between self-evaluation error and age, cognitive function, physical impairment, ability to control emotions, or onset months poststroke.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with stroke and therapists evaluated the same movements differently, and this can be dependent on hemispheric damage. Therapists might need to encourage patients with LHD who underestimate their movement to ensure continuous use of their more-affected arm. Patients with RHD who overestimate their movement might need treatment to overcome impaired self-awareness, such as video recordings, to protect from unexpected dangerous situations.

Relevant factors for arm choice in reaching movement: a scoping review

[Purpose] Arm choice is an unconscious action selection performed in daily life. Even if hemiparetic stroke patients can use their paretic arm, they compensate for their movements with their non-paretic arm, leading to decreased function of their paretic arm. Therefore, we need to encourage stroke patients to actively use their paretic arm. For this purpose, it is imperative to understand the process of selection of the left or right hand by patients. Here, we conducted a scoping review to summarize the findings of previous studies on factors and brain regions related to choice of arm. [Methods] We used PubMed/Medline, EBSCO, and the Cochrane Library to obtain research literature according to the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. [Results] Twenty-five of the 81 articles obtained from the search met the defined criteria. Cost, success, and dominance were investigated as relevant factors for arm choice. We also extracted articles examining the relationship between the posterior parietal and premotor cortex activity and arm choice. [Conclusion] From these results, we considered ways to facilitate the use of the paretic arm, such as the use of virtual reality systems or exoskeletal robots to modulate the reaching cost and success rates, or non-invasive brain stimulation methods to modulate brain activity.

Effort, success, and side of lesion determine arm choice in individuals with chronic stroke

In neurotypical individuals, arm choice in reaching movements depends on expected biomechanical effort, expected success, and a handedness bias. Following a stroke, does arm choice change to account for the decreased motor performance, or does it follow a preinjury habitual preference pattern? Participants with mild-to-moderate chronic stroke who were right-handed before stroke performed reaching movements in both spontaneous and forced-choice blocks, under no-time, medium-time, and fast-time constraint conditions designed to modulate reaching success. Mixed-effects logistic regression models of arm choice revealed that expected effort predicted choices. However, expected success only strongly predicted choice in left-hemiparetic individuals. In addition, reaction times decreased in left-hemiparetic individuals between the no-time and the fast-time constraint conditions but showed no changes in right-hemiparetic individuals. Finally, arm choice in the no-time constraint condition correlated with a clinical measure of spontaneous arm use for right-, but not for left-hemiparetic individuals. Our results are consistent with the view that right-hemiparetic individuals show a habitual pattern of arm choice for reaching movements relatively independent of failures. In contrast, left-hemiparetic individuals appear to choose their paretic left arm more optimally: that is, if a movement with the paretic arm is predicted to be not successful in the upcoming movement, the nonparetic right arm is chosen instead.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Although we are seldom aware of it, we constantly make decisions to use one arm or the other in daily activities. Here, we studied whether these decisions change following stroke. Our results show that effort, success, and side of lesion determine arm choice in a reaching task: whereas left-paretic individuals modified their arm choice in response to failures in reaching the target, right-paretic individuals showed a pattern of choice independent of failures.

Obstacle Avoidance and Dual-Tasking During Reaching While Standing in Patients With Mild Chronic Stroke

Background. Poststroke individuals use their paretic arms less often than expected in daily life situations, even when motor recovery is scored highly in clinical tests. Real-world environments are often unpredictable and require the ability to multitask and make decisions about rapid and accurate arm movement adjustments. Objective. To identify whether and to what extent cognitive-motor deficits in well-recovered individuals with stroke affect the ability to rapidly adapt reaching movements in changing cognitive and environmental conditions. Methods. Thirteen individuals with mild stroke and 11 healthy controls performed an obstacle avoidance task in a virtual environment while standing. Subjects reached for a virtual juice bottle with their hemiparetic arm as quickly as possible under single- and dual-task conditions. In the single-task condition, a sliding glass door partially obstructed the reaching path of the paretic arm. A successful trial was counted when the subject touched the bottle without the hand colliding with the door. In the dual-task condition, subjects repeated the same task while performing an auditory-verbal working memory task. Results. Individuals with stroke had significantly lower success rates than controls in avoiding the moving door in single-task (stroke: 51.8 ± 21.2%, control: 70.6 ± 12.7%; P = .018) and dual-task conditions (stroke: 40.0 ± 27.6%, control: 65.3 ± 20.0%; P = .015). Endpoint speed was lower in stroke subjects for successful trials in both conditions. Obstacle avoidance deficits were exacerbated by increased cognitive demands in both groups. Individuals reporting greater confidence using their hemiparetic arm had higher success rates. Conclusion. Clinically well-recovered individuals with stroke may have persistent deficits performing a complex reaching task.

The probability of choosing both hands depends on an interaction between motor capacity and limb-specific control in chronic stroke

A goal of rehabilitation after stroke is to promote pre-stroke levels of arm use for every day, frequently bimanual, functional activities. We reasoned that, after a stroke, the choice to use one or both hands for bimanual tasks might depend not only on residual motor capacity, but also the specialized demands imposed by the task on the paretic hand. To capture spontaneous, task-specific choices, we covertly observed 50 pre-stroke right-handed chronic stroke survivors (25 each of left, LHD, and right-hemisphere damage, RHD) and 11 age-similar control adults and recorded their hand use strategies for two pairs of bimanual tasks with distinct demands: one with greater precision requirements (photo-album tasks), and another with greater stabilization requirements (letter-envelope tasks). The primary outcome was the choice to use one or both hands. Logistic regression was used to test the two hypotheses that the probability of choosing a bimanual strategy would be greater in those with less severe motor impairment and also in those with LHD. When collapsed across the four tasks, we found support for these hypotheses. Notably, however, the influence of these factors on bimanual choice varied based on task demands. For the photo-album pair, the probability of a bimanual strategy was greater for those with LHD compared to RHD, regardless of the degree of motor impairment. For the letter-envelope pair, we found a significant interaction between impairment and side of lesion in determining the likelihood of choosing both hands. Therefore, the manner in which side of lesion moderates the effect of impairment on hand use depends on the task.

The Efficiency, Efficacy, and Retention of Task Practice in Chronic Stroke

In motor skill learning, larger doses of practice lead to greater efficacy of practice, lower efficiency of practice, and better long-term retention. Whether such learning principles apply to motor practice after stroke is unclear. Here, we developed novel mixed-effects models of the change in the perceived quality of arm movements during and following task practice. The models were fitted to data from a recent randomized controlled trial of the effect of dose of task practice in chronic stroke. Analysis of the models' learning and retention rates demonstrated an increase in efficacy of practice with greater doses, a decrease in efficiency of practice with both additional dosages and additional bouts of training, and fast initial decay following practice. Two additional effects modulated retention: a positive "self-practice" effect, and a negative effect of dose. Our results further suggest that for patients with sufficient arm use post-practice, self-practice will further improve use.