Susan E. Fasoli

Treatment Interventions for the Paretic Upper Limb of Stroke Survivors: A Critical Review

Despite a threefold increase in treatment interventions studies during the past 10 years, “best practice” for the rehabilitation of the paretic upper limb is still unclear. This review aims to lessen uncertainty in the management of the poststroke upper limb. Two separate searches of the scientific literature from 1966-2001 yielded 333 articles. Three referees, using strict inclusion and exclusion criteria, selected 68 relevant references. Cohort studies, randomized control trials, and systematic reviews were critically appraised. Mean randomized control trial quality (n = 33) was 17.1/27 (SD = 5.2, 95% CI = 15.2–19.0, range = 6–26). Mean quality of cohort studies (n = 29) was 11.8/27 (SD = 3.8, 95% CI = 10.4–13.2, range = 4–19). Quantitative syntheses were done using theZ-statistic. This systematic review indicated that sensorimotor training; motor learning training that includes the use of imagery, electrical stimulation alone, or combined with biofeedback; and engaging the client in repetitive, novel tasks can be effective in reducing motor impairment after stroke. Furthermore, careful handling, electrical stimulation, movement with elevation, strapping, and the avoidance of overhead pulleys could effectively reduce or prevent pain in the paretic upper limb. Rehabilitation specialists can use this research synthesis to guide their selection of effective treatment techniques for persons with impairments after stroke.

Motions or muscles? Some behavioral factors underlying robotic assistance of motor recovery

Robotics and related technologies have begun to realize their promise to improve the delivery of rehabilitation therapy. However, the mechanism by which they enhance recovery remains unclear. Ultimately, recovery depends on biology, yet the details of the recovery process remain largely unknown; a deeper understanding is important to accelerate refinements of robotic therapy or suggest new approaches. Fortunately, robots provide an excellent instrument platform from which to study recovery at the behavioral level. This article reviews some initial insights about the process of upper-limb behavioral recovery that have emerged from our work. Evidence to date suggests that the form of therapy may be more important than its intensity: muscle strengthening offers no advantage over movement training. Passive movement is insufficient; active participation is required. Progressive training based on measures of movement coordination yields substantially improved outcomes. Together these results indicate that movement coordination rather than muscle activation may be the most appropriate focus for robotic therapy.

Robot-Aided Neurorehabilitation: From Evidence-Based to Science-Based Rehabilitation

Abstract There is no “magic bullet” in rehabilitation. In the absence of direct neural transplants, neurological rehabilitation is an arduous process. We have pioneered the clinical application of robotics in stroke rehabilitation and have shown evidence of the positive impact of targeted exercise on stroke recovery. In this article, we will review results obtained in the initial clinical trials with 96 stroke patients at the Burke Rehabilitation Hospital. We will provide evidence that robot-aided training enhances recovery, that this enhanced recovery is sustained in the long term, and that this recovery is not due to a general physiological improvement — in fact, it appears to be limb and muscle group specific. An evidence-based approach must now segue into a more scientific approach to stroke rehabilitation. Given the length of the required protocols and patients variability and limited census, the practical limitations of the evidence-based approach are self-evident and extend trials for years. Each patient and lesion is unique in stroke rehabilitation, so there is no reason to believe that a “one-size-fits-all” optimal treatment exists. To optimize therapy for individual patients, we need science-based models. In this article, we will summarize the scientific tools and models that we are investigating and present some of the results to date.

A paradigm shift for rehabilitation robotics

Therapeutic robots enhance clinician productivity in facilitating patient recovery. In this article, we presented an overview of the remarkable growth in the activities in the area of therapeutic robotics and of experiences with our devices. We briefly review the published clinical literature in this emerging field and our initial clinical results in stroke. However, we also report our initial efforts that go beyond stroke, broadening the potential population that might benefit from this class of technology by discussing case studies of applications to other neurological diseases. We will also highlight the underexploited potential of this technology as an evaluation tool.

Robotic Technology and Stroke Rehabilitation: Translating Research into Practice

Abstract Research on the effectiveness of robotic therapy for the paretic upper limb after stroke has shown statistically significant reductions in motor impairment during both acute and chronic phases of recovery. Despite growing empirical support for this technology and a stronger focus on optimizing rehabilitation outcomes and productivity, there continues to be a disconnect between research and clinical practice. We review studies on the use of robot-aided neurorehabilitation for the paretic arm after stroke and discuss ways in which this technology may provide opportunities for intensive training that complement more conventional therapy methods.

Short-duration robotic therapy in stroke patients with severe upper-limb motor impairment

Chronic motor deficits in the upper limb (UL) are a major contributor to disability following stroke. This study investigated the effect of short-duration robot-assisted therapy on motor impairment, as measured by clinical scales and robot-derived performance measures in patients with chronic, severe UL impairments after stroke. As part of a larger study, 15 individuals with chronic, severe UL paresis (Fugl-Meyer < 15) after stroke (minimum 6 mo postonset) performed 18 sessions of robot-assisted UL rehabilitation that consisted of goal-directed planar reaching tasks over a period of 3 weeks. Outcome measures included the Fugl-Meyer Assessment, the Motor Power Assessment, the Wolf Motor Function Test, the Stroke Impact Scale, and five robot-derived measures that reflect motor control (aiming error, mean speed, peak speed, mean:peak speed ratio, and movement duration). Robot-assisted training produced statistically significant improvements from baseline to posttreatment in the Fugl-Meyer and Motor Power Assessment scores and the quality of motion (quantified by a reduction in aiming error and movement duration with an increase in mean speed and mean:peak speed ratio). Our findings indicate that robot-assisted UL rehabilitation can reduce UL impairment and improve motor control in patients with severe UL paresis from chronic stroke.

Assessing the Motor Status Score: A Scale for the Evaluation of Upper Limb Motor Outcomes in Patients after Stroke

The Motor Status Scale (MSS) measures shoulder, elbow (maximum score = 40), wrist, hand, and finger movements (maximum score = 42), and expands the measurement of upper extremity impairment and disability provided by the Fugl-Meyer (FM) score. This work examines the interrater reliability and criterion validity of the MSS performed in patients admitted to a rehabilitation hospital 21 ± 4 days after stroke. Using the MSS and the FM, 7 occupational therapists masked to each other’s judgments, evaluated 12 consecutive patients with stroke. Two therapists evaluated 6 additional patients on consecutive days. Intraclass correlation coefficients were significant for each group of raters for the shoulder/elbow and for the wrist/hand (P < 0.0001); test-retest measures were also significant for the shoulder/elbow (Pearson correlation coefficient r = 0.99, P < 0.004) and for the wrist/hand (Pearson correlation coefficient r = 0.99, P < 0.003). The internal item consistency for the overall MSS was significant (Cronbach alpha = 0.98, P < 0.0001). Finally the correlation between the MSS and the FM (R 2 = 0.964) was significant (P < 0.0001). The MSS affords a reliable and valid assessment of upper limb impairment and disability following stroke.

Upper limb robotic therapy for children with hemiplegia.

Fasoli SE, Fragala-Pinkham M, Hughes R, Hogan N, Krebs HI, Stein J: Upper limb robotic therapy for children with hemiplegia. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2008;87:929–936. Objective:Our aim was to examine the feasibility and effects of robotic therapy for children with cerebral palsy and upper limb hemiplegia. Design:A single group within-subjects design was used. Twelve children aged 5–12 yrs with moderate to severe motor impairments participated in 1-hr robotic therapy sessions, 2 times per week for 8 wks. During each session, children used the paretic arm to perform 640 repetitive, goal-directed planar reaching movements, with robotic assistance as needed. Primary outcomes were the Quality of Upper Extremity Skills Test (QUEST) and the Fugl-Meyer Assessment upper limb subtest. Secondary outcomes were the Modified Ashworth Scale, peak isometric strength of shoulder and elbow muscles, and parent questionnaire scores. Results:We found significant gains in total QUEST and Fugl-Meyer Assessment scores at discharge and follow-up and in isometric strength of elbow extensors at discharge. The parent questionnaire showed significant improvements in “how much” and “how well” children used the paretic arm during daily functional tasks at home. Conclusion:Robotic therapy can provide new opportunities for improving upper limb coordination and function in children with moderate to severe impairments due to cerebral palsy or stroke.

Learning, Not Adaptation, Characterizes Stroke Motor Recovery: Evidence From Kinematic Changes Induced by Robot-Assisted Therapy in Trained and Untrained Task in the Same Workspace

Both the American Heart Association and the VA/DoD endorse upper-extremity robot-mediated rehabilitation therapy for stroke care. However, we do not know yet how to optimize therapy for a particular patients needs. Here, we explore whether we must train patients for each functional task that they must perform during their activities of daily living or alternatively capacitate patients to perform a class of tasks and have therapists assist them later in translating the observed gains into activities of daily living. The former implies that motor adaptation is a better model for motor recovery. The latter implies that motor learning (which allows for generalization) is a better model for motor recovery. We quantified trained and untrained movements performed by 158 recovering stroke patients via 13 metrics, including movement smoothness and submovements. Improvements were observed both in trained and untrained movements suggesting that generalization occurred. Our findings suggest that, as motor recovery progresses, an internal representation of the task is rebuilt by the brain in a process that better resembles motor learning than motor adaptation. Our findings highlight possible improvements for therapeutic algorithms design, suggesting sparse-activity-set training should suffice over exhaustive sets of task specific training.

Does shorter rehabilitation limit potential recovery poststroke

Objective. To examine retrospectively the recovery of patients engaged in robotic research during a 6- to 7-week course of inpatient rehabilitation. Because timing of the Interim evaluation at 31/2 weeks was comparable to the present length of inpatient stroke rehabilitation, the authors assessed whether significant gains in motor abilities occurred after the time when most stroke patients today are discharged home. Methods. Fifty-six inpatients with a single, unilateral stroke were randomly assigned to a robot therapy or robot exposure group. Therapists blinded to group assignment administered the Fugl-Meyer, Motor Status Score, and MRC motor power test. Results. Significant improvements in upper-limb motor abilities occurred throughout a period approximately twice the present length of stay in inpatient rehabilitation. However, in the latter half of this period, patients who received conventional therapy showed little improvement, whereas patients who received robot training plus conventional therapy continued to improve. Conclusion. Further opportunities for recovery after stroke are possible by extending intensive therapy beyond present inpatient rehabilitation stays.