TBI Rehabilitation

[Abstract + References] Canadian Platform for Trials in Noninvasive Brain Stimulation (CanStim) Consensus Recommendations for Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Upper Extremity Motor Stroke Rehabilitation Trials

Abstract

Objective. To develop consensus recommendations for the use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) as an adjunct intervention for upper extremity motor recovery in stroke rehabilitation clinical trials. 

Participants. The Canadian Platform for Trials in Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation (CanStim) convened a multidisciplinary team of clinicians and researchers from institutions across Canada to form the CanStim Consensus Expert Working Group. 

Consensus Process. Four consensus themes were identified: (1) patient population, (2) rehabilitation interventions, (3) outcome measures, and (4) stimulation parameters. Theme leaders conducted comprehensive evidence reviews for each theme, and during a 2-day Consensus Meeting, the Expert Working Group used a weighted dot-voting consensus procedure to achieve consensus on recommendations for the use of rTMS as an adjunct intervention in motor stroke recovery rehabilitation clinical trials. 

Results. Based on best available evidence, consensus was achieved for recommendations identifying the target poststroke population, rehabilitation intervention, objective and subjective outcomes, and specific rTMS parameters for rehabilitation trials evaluating the efficacy of rTMS as an adjunct therapy for upper extremity motor stroke recovery. 

Conclusions. The establishment of the CanStim platform and development of these consensus recommendations is a first step toward the translation of noninvasive brain stimulation technologies from the laboratory to clinic to enhance stroke recovery.

References

1.Veerbeek, JM, van Wegen, E, van Peppen, R, et al. What is the evidence for physical therapy poststroke? A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2014;9:e87987.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
2.Boyd, LA, Vidoni, ED, Wessel, BD. Motor learning after stroke: is skill acquisition a prerequisite for contralesional neuroplastic change? Neurosci Lett. 2010;482:21-25.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
3.Dimyan, MA, Cohen, LG. Neuroplasticity in the context of motor rehabilitation after stroke. Nat Rev Neurol. 2011;7:76-85.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
4.Arya, KN, Verma, R, Garg, RK, Sharma, VP, Agarwal, M, Aggarwal, GG. Meaningful task-specific training (MTST) for stroke rehabilitation: a randomized controlled trial. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2012;19:193-211.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
5.French, B, Thomas, LH, Coupe, J, et al. Repetitive task training for improving functional ability after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;(11):CD006073.
Google Scholar | Medline
6.Kimberley, TJ, Samargia, S, Moore, LG, Shakya, JK, Lang, CE. Comparison of amounts and types of practice during rehabilitation for traumatic brain injury and stroke. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2010;47:851-862.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
7.Teasell, R, Meyer, MJ, Foley, N, Salter, K, Willems, D. Stroke rehabilitation in Canada: a work in progress. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2009;16:11-19.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
8.Barrett, M, Snow, JC, Kirkland, MC, et al. Excessive sedentary time during in-patient stroke rehabilitation. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2018;25:366-374.
Google Scholar | Medline
9.Rossi, S, Hallett, M, Rossini, PM, Pascual-Leone, A; Safety of TMS Consensus Group . Safety, ethical considerations, and application guidelines for the use of transcranial magnetic stimulation in clinical practice and research. Clin Neurophysiol. 2009;120:2008-2039.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
10.Koganemaru, S, Mima, T, Thabit, MN, et al. Recovery of upper-limb function due to enhanced use-dependent plasticity in chronic stroke patients. Brain. 2010;133:3373-3384.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
11.Corti, M, Patten, C, Triggs, W. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation of motor cortex after stroke: a focused review. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2012;91:254-270.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
12.Pascual-Leone, A, Pridmore, H. Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 1995;29:698.
Google Scholar | Medline
13.Di Lazzaro, V, Rothwell, JC. Corticospinal activity evoked and modulated by non-invasive stimulation of the intact human motor cortex. J Physiol. 2014;592:4115-4128.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
14.Di Lazzaro, V, Dileone, M, Pilato, F, et al. Modulation of motor cortex neuronal networks by rTMS: comparison of local and remote effects of six different protocols of stimulation. J Neurophysiol. 2011;105:2150-2156.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
15.Hamada, M, Hanajima, R, Terao, Y, et al. Origin of facilitation in repetitive, 1.5 ms interval, paired pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (rPPS) of the human motor cortex. Clin Neurophysiol. 2007;118:1596-1601.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
16.Takeuchi, N, Chuma, T, Matsuo, Y, Watanabe, I, Ikoma, K. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation of contralesional primary motor cortex improves hand function after stroke. Stroke. 2005;36:2681-2686.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
17.van Lieshout, ECC, Visser-Meily, JMA, Neggers, SFW, van der Worp, HB, Dijkhuizen, RM. Brain stimulation for arm recovery after stroke (B-STARS): protocol for a randomised controlled trial in subacute stroke patients. BMJ Open. 2017;7:e016566.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
18.Thiel, A, Black, SE, Rochon, EA, et al. Non-invasive repeated therapeutic stimulation for aphasia recovery: a multilingual, multicenter aphasia trial. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2015;24:751-758.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
19.Harvey, RL, Edwards, D, Dunning, K, et al. Randomized sham-controlled trial of navigated repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for motor recovery in stroke. Stroke. 2018;49:2138-2146.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
20.Lefaucheur, JP, Aleman, A, Baeken, C, et al. Evidence-based guidelines on the therapeutic use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS): an update (2014-2018). Clin Neurophysiol. 2020;131:474-528.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
21.Kwakkel, G, Lannin, NA, Borschmann, K, et al. Standardized measurement of sensorimotor recovery in stroke trials: consensus-based core recommendations from the Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Roundtable. Int J Stroke. 2017;12:451-461.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI
22.Pollock, A, Farmer, SE, Brady, MC, et al. Interventions for improving upper limb function after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;2014(11):CD010820.
Google Scholar
23.Coupar, F, Pollock, A, Rowe, P, Weir, C, Langhorne, P. Predictors of upper limb recovery after stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Rehabil. 2012;26:291-313.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI
24.Hatem, SM, Saussez, G, Della Faille, M, et al. Rehabilitation of motor function after stroke: a multiple systematic review focused on techniques to stimulate upper extremity recovery. Front Hum Neurosci. 2016;10:442.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
25.Hao, Z, Wang, D, Zeng, Y, Liu, M. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for improving function after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;(5):CD008862.
Google Scholar | Medline
26.Sebastianelli, L, Versace, V, Martignago, S, et al. Low-frequency rTMS of the unaffected hemisphere in stroke patients: a systematic review. Acta Neurol Scand. 2017;136:585-605.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
27.Hsu, WY, Cheng, CH, Liao, KK, Lee, IH, Lin, YY. Effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on motor functions in patients with stroke: a meta-analysis. Stroke. 2012;43:1849-1857.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
28.Paolucci, S, Antonucci, G, Grasso, MG, et al. Early versus delayed inpatient stroke rehabilitation: a matched comparison conducted in Italy. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2000;81:695-700.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
29.Jorgensen, HS, Nakayama, H, Raaschou, HO, Vive-Larsen, J, Stoier, M, Olsen, TS. Outcome and time course of recovery in stroke. Part II: time course of recovery. The Copenhagen Stroke Study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1995;76:406-412.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
30.Hayward, KS, Schmidt, J, Lohse, KR, et al. Are we armed with the right data? Pooled individual data review of biomarkers in people with severe upper limb impairment after stroke. Neuroimage Clin. 2017;13:310-319.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
31.Bembenek, JP, Kurczych, K, KarliNski, M, Czlonkowska, A. The prognostic value of motor-evoked potentials in motor recovery and functional outcome after stroke—a systematic review of the literature. Funct Neurol. 2012;27:79-84.
Google Scholar | Medline | ISI
32.Boyd, LA, Hayward, KS, Ward, NS, et al. Biomarkers of stroke recovery: Consensus-based core recommendations from the Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Roundtable. Int J Stroke. 2017;12:480-493.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI
33.Langhorne, P, Bernhardt, J, Kwakkel, G. Stroke rehabilitation. Lancet. 2011;377:1693-1702.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
34.Zhang, L, Xing, G, Fan, Y, Guo, Z, Chen, H, Mu, Q. Short- and long-term effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on upper limb motor function after stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Rehabil. 2017;31:1137-1153.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI
35.Xiang, H, Sun, J, Tang, X, Zeng, K, Wu, X. The effect and optimal parameters of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on motor recovery in stroke patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Clin Rehabil. 2019;33:847-864.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI
36.O’Brien, AT, Bertolucci, F, Torrealba-Acosta, G, Huerta, R, Fregni, F, Thibaut, A. Non-invasive brain stimulation for fine motor improvement after stroke: a meta-analysis. Eur J Neurol. 2018;25:1017-1026.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
37.Farmer, SE, Durairaj, V, Swain, I, Pandyan, AD. Assistive technologies: can they contribute to rehabilitation of the upper limb after stroke? Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2014;95:968-985.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
38.Agosta, S, Galante, E, Ferraro, F, Pascual-Leone, A, Oster, J, Battelli, L. Report of a delayed seizure after low frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in a chronic stroke patient. Clin Neurophysiol. 2016;127:1736-1737.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
39.Kumar, N, Padma Srivastava, MV, Verma, R, Sharma, H, Modak, T. Can low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation precipitate a late-onset seizure in a stroke patient? Clin Neurophysiol. 2016;127:1734-1736.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
40.Liepert, J, Zittel, S, Weiller, C. Improvement of dexterity by single session low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation over the contralesional motor cortex in acute stroke: a double-blind placebo-controlled crossover trial. Restor Neurol Neurosci. 2007;25:461-465.
Google Scholar | Medline | ISI
41.Nitsche, MA . Co-incidence or causality? Seizures after slow rTMS in stroke patients. Clin Neurophysiol. 2016;127:1020-1021.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
42.Lefaucheur, JP, Andre-Obadia, N, Antal, A, et al. Evidence-based guidelines on the therapeutic use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS). Clin Neurophysiol. 2014;125:2150-2206.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
43.Ameli, M, Grefkes, C, Kemper, F, et al. Differential effects of high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation over ipsilesional primary motor cortex in cortical and subcortical middle cerebral artery stroke. Ann Neurol. 2009;66:298-309.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
44.Park, CH, Kou, N, Ward, NS. The contribution of lesion location to upper limb deficit after stroke. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2016;87:1283-1286.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
45.Parikh, RM, Robinson, RG, Lipsey, JR, Starkstein, SE, Fedoroff, JP, Price, TR. The impact of poststroke depression on recovery in activities of daily living over a 2-year follow-up. Arch Neurol. 1990;47:785-789.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
46.MacIntosh, BJ, Edwards, JD, Kang, M, et al. Post-stroke fatigue and depressive symptoms are differentially related to mobility and cognitive performance. Front Aging Neurosci. 2017;9:343.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
47.Ginex, V, Veronelli, L, Vanacore, N, Lacorte, E, Monti, A, Corbo, M. Motor recovery in post-stroke patients with aphasia: the role of specific linguistic abilities. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2017;24:428-434.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
48.Cunningham, DA, Machado, A, Janini, D, et al. Assessment of inter-hemispheric imbalance using imaging and noninvasive brain stimulation in patients with chronic stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2015;96(4 suppl):S94-S103.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
49.Casaubon, LK, Boulanger, JM, Glasser, E, et al. Canadian Stroke Best Practice Recommendations: acute inpatient stroke care guidelines, update 2015. Int J Stroke. 2016;11:239-252.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI
50.Teasell, R, Norine, F, Richardson, M, Allen, L, Cotoi, A. Outpatient Stroke Rehabilitation 2018. Accessed December 7, 2020. http://www.ebrsr.com/
Google Scholar
51.Peurala, SH, Kantanen, MP, Sjogren, T, Paltamaa, J, Karhula, M, Heinonen, A. Effectiveness of constraint-induced movement therapy on activity and participation after stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Clin Rehabil. 2012;26:209-223.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI
52.Hubbard, IJ, Parsons, MW, Neilson, C, Carey, LM. Task-specific training: evidence for and translation to clinical practice. Occup Ther Int. 2009;16:175-189.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
53.Wattchow, KA, McDonnell, MN, Hillier, SL. Rehabilitation interventions for upper limb function in the first four weeks following stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the evidence. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2018;99:367-382.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
54.Waddell, KJ, Birkenmeier, RL, Moore, JL, Hornby, TG, Lang, CE. Feasibility of high-repetition, task-specific training for individuals with upper-extremity paresis. Am J Occup Ther. 2014;68:444-453.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
55.Almhdawi, KA, Mathiowetz, VG, White, M, delMas, RC. Efficacy of occupational therapy task-oriented approach in upper extremity post-stroke rehabilitation. Occup Ther Int. 2016;23:444-456.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
56.Askim, T, Indredavik, B, Vangberg, T, Haberg, A. Motor network changes associated with successful motor skill relearning after acute ischemic stroke: a longitudinal functional magnetic resonance imaging study. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2009;23:295-304.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI
57.Hebert, D, Lindsay, MP, McIntyre, A, et al. Canadian stroke best practice recommendations: stroke rehabilitation practice guidelines, update 2015. Int J Stroke. 2016;11:459-484.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI
58.Kunkel, A, Kopp, B, Muller, G, et al. Constraint-induced movement therapy for motor recovery in chronic stroke patients. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1999;80:624-628.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
59.Harris, JE, Eng, JJ, Miller, WC, Dawson, AS. A self-administered Graded Repetitive Arm Supplementary Program (GRASP) improves arm function during inpatient stroke rehabilitation: a multi-site randomized controlled trial. Stroke. 2009;40:2123-2128.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
60.Thrane, G, Friborg, O, Anke, A, Indredavik, B. A meta-analysis of constraint-induced movement therapy after stroke. J Rehabil Med. 2014;46:833-842.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
61.Pedlow, K, Lennon, S, Wilson, C. Application of constraint-induced movement therapy in clinical practice: an online survey. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2014;95:276-282.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
62.Viana, R, Teasell, R. Barriers to the implementation of constraint-induced movement therapy into practice. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2012;19:104-114.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
63.Fleet, A, Che, M, Mackay-Lyons, M, et al. Examining the use of constraint-induced movement therapy in Canadian neurological occupational and physical therapy. Physiother Can. 2014;66:60-71.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
64.Connell, LA, McMahon, NE, Harris, JE, Watkins, CL, Eng, JJ. A formative evaluation of the implementation of an upper limb stroke rehabilitation intervention in clinical practice: a qualitative interview study. Implement Sci. 2014;9:90.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
65.Hiscock, A, Miller, S, Rothwell, J, Tallis, RC, Pomeroy, VM. Informing dose-finding studies of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation to enhance motor function: a qualitative systematic review. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2008;22:228-249.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI
66.Graef, P, Dadalt, MLR, Rodrigues, D, Stein, C, Pagnussat, AS. Transcranial magnetic stimulation combined with upper-limb training for improving function after stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Neurol Sci. 2016;369:149-158.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
67.Abo, M, Kakuda, W, Momosaki, R, et al. Randomized, multicenter, comparative study of NEURO versus CIMT in poststroke patients with upper limb hemiparesis: the NEURO-VERIFY Study. Int J Stroke. 2014;9:607-612.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI
68.Foley, N, McClure, JA, Meyer, M, Salter, K, Bureau, Y, Teasell, R. Inpatient rehabilitation following stroke: amount of therapy received and associations with functional recovery. Disabil Rehabil. 2012;34:2132-2138.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
69.Jette, DU, Latham, NK, Smout, RJ, Gassaway, J, Slavin, MD, Horn, SD. Physical therapy interventions for patients with stroke in inpatient rehabilitation facilities. Phys Ther. 2005;85:238-248.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
70.Hayward, KS, Brauer, SG. Dose of arm activity training during acute and subacute rehabilitation post stroke: a systematic review of the literature. Clin Rehabil. 2015;29:1234-1243.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI
71.Lohse, KR, Lang, CE, Boyd, LA. Is more better? Using metadata to explore dose-response relationships in stroke rehabilitation. Stroke. 2014;45:2053-2058.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
72.Lang, CE, Lohse, KR, Birkenmeier, RL. Dose and timing in neurorehabilitation: prescribing motor therapy after stroke. Curr Opin Neurol. 2015;28:549-555.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
73.Dromerick, AW, Lang, CE, Birkenmeier, RL, et al. Very early constraint-induced movement during stroke rehabilitation (VECTORS): a single-center RCT. Neurology. 2009;73:195-201.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
74.Santisteban, L, Teremetz, M, Bleton, JP, Baron, JC, Maier, MA, Lindberg, PG. Upper limb outcome measures used in stroke rehabilitation studies: a systematic literature review. PLoS One. 2016;11:e0154792.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
75.Hong, I, Bonilha, HS. Psychometric properties of upper extremity outcome measures validated by Rasch analysis: a systematic review. Int J Rehabil Res. 2017;40:1-10.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
76.Kirton, A, Chen, R, Friefeld, S, Gunraj, C, Pontigon, AM, Deveber, G. Contralesional repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for chronic hemiparesis in subcortical paediatric stroke: a randomised trial. Lancet Neurol. 2008;7:507-513.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
77.Noorkoiv, M, Rodgers, H, Price, CI. Accelerometer measurement of upper extremity movement after stroke: a systematic review of clinical studies. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2014;11:144.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
78.Geyh, S, Kurt, T, Brockow, T, et al. Identifying the concepts contained in outcome measures of clinical trials on stroke using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health as a reference. J Rehabil Med. 2004(44 suppl):56-62.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
79.Bushnell, C, Bettger, JP, Cockroft, KM, et al. Chronic stroke outcome measures for motor function intervention trials: expert panel recommendations. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2015;8(6 suppl 3):S163-S169.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
80.Van der Lee, JH, De Groot, V, Beckerman, H, Wagenaar, RC, Lankhorst, GJ, Bouter, LM. The intra- and interrater reliability of the action research arm test: a practical test of upper extremity function in patients with stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2001;82:14-19.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
81.Bonita, R, Beaglehole, R. Recovery of motor function after stroke. Stroke. 1988;19:1497-1500.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
82.Banks, JL, Marotta, CA. Outcomes validity and reliability of the modified Rankin scale: implications for stroke clinical trials: a literature review and synthesis. Stroke. 2007;38:1091-1096.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
83.Quinn, TJ, Dawson, J, Walters, MR, Lees, KR. Reliability of the modified Rankin Scale: a systematic review. Stroke. 2009;40:3393-3395.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
84.Pike, S, Lannin, NA, Wales, K, Cusick, A. A systematic review of the psychometric properties of the Action Research Arm Test in neurorehabilitation. Aust Occup Ther J. 2018;65:449-471.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
85.Alt Murphy, M, Resteghini, C, Feys, P, Lamers, I. An overview of systematic reviews on upper extremity outcome measures after stroke. BMC Neurol. 2015;15:29.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
86.Law, M, Baptiste, S, McColl, M, Opzoomer, A, Polatajko, H, Pollock, N. The Canadian Occupational Performance Measure: an outcome measure for occupational therapy. Can J Occup Ther. 1990;57:82-87.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals
87.Duncan, PW, Wallace, D, Lai, SM, Johnson, D, Embretson, S, Laster, LJ. The Stroke Impact Scale version 2.0. Evaluation of reliability, validity, and sensitivity to change. Stroke. 1999;30:2131-2140.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
88.Kirton, A, Ciechanski, P, Zewdie, E, et al. Transcranial direct current stimulation for children with perinatal stroke and hemiparesis. Neurology. 2017;88:259-267.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
89.Yang, SY, Lin, CY, Lee, YC, Chang, JH. The Canadian occupational performance measure for patients with stroke: a systematic review. J Phys Ther Sci. 2017;29:548-555.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
90.Katzan, IL, Thompson, NR, Lapin, B, Uchino, K. Added value of patient-reported outcome measures in stroke clinical practice. J Am Heart Assoc. 2017;6:e005356.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
91.Stewart, JC, Cramer, SC. Patient-reported measures provide unique insights into motor function after stroke. Stroke. 2013;44:1111-1116.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
92.Sullivan, JE, Espe, LE, Kelly, AM, Veilbig, LE, Kwasny, MJ. Feasibility and outcomes of a community-based, pedometer-monitored walking program in chronic stroke: a pilot study. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2014;21:101-110.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
93.Vetrovsky, T, Cupka, J, Dudek, M, et al. A pedometer-based walking intervention with and without email counseling in general practice: a pilot randomized controlled trial. BMC Public Health. 2018;18:635.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
94.Zhang, L, Xing, G, Shuai, S, et al. Low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for stroke-induced upper limb motor deficit: a meta-analysis. Neural Plast. 2017;2017:2758097.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
95.Rossini, PM, Burke, D, Chen, R, et al. Non-invasive electrical and magnetic stimulation of the brain, spinal cord, roots and peripheral nerves: Basic principles and procedures for routine clinical and research application. An updated report from an I.F.C.N. Committee. Clin Neurophysiol. 2015;126:1071-1107.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
96.Le, Q, Qu, Y, Tao, Y, Zhu, S. Effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on hand function recovery and excitability of the motor cortex after stroke: a meta-analysis. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2014;93:422-430.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
97.Ludemann-Podubecka, J, Bosl, K, Nowak, DA. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for motor recovery of the upper limb after stroke. Prog Brain Res. 2015;218:281-311.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
98.Liepert, J, Restemeyer, C, Kucinski, T, Zittel, S, Weiller, C. Motor strokes: the lesion location determines motor excitability changes. Stroke. 2005;36:2648-2653.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
99.Shimizu, T, Hosaki, A, Hino, T, et al. Motor cortical disinhibition in the unaffected hemisphere after unilateral cortical stroke. Brain. 2002;125(pt 8):1896-1907.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
100.Volz, LJ, Vollmer, M, Michely, J, Fink, GR, Rothwell, JC, Grefkes, C. Time-dependent functional role of the contralesional motor cortex after stroke. Neuroimage Clin. 2017;16:165-174.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
101.Khedr, EM, Abdel-Fadeil, MR, Farghali, A, Qaid, M. Role of 1 and 3 Hz repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on motor function recovery after acute ischaemic stroke. Eur J Neurol. 2009;16:1323-1330.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
102.Sasaki, N, Mizutani, S, Kakuda, W, Abo, M. Comparison of the effects of high- and low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on upper limb hemiparesis in the early phase of stroke. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2013;22:413-418.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
103.Seniow, J, Bilik, M, Lesniak, M, Waldowski, K, Iwanski, S, Czlonkowska, A. Transcranial magnetic stimulation combined with physiotherapy in rehabilitation of poststroke hemiparesis: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2012;26:1072-1079.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI
104.Etoh, S, Noma, T, Ikeda, K, et al. Effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on repetitive facilitation exercises of the hemiplegic hand in chronic stroke patients. J Rehabil Med. 2013;45:843-847.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
105.Avenanti, A, Coccia, M, Ladavas, E, Provinciali, L, Ceravolo, MG. Low-frequency rTMS promotes use-dependent motor plasticity in chronic stroke: a randomized trial. Neurology. 2012;78:256-264.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
106.Fregni, F, Boggio, PS, Valle, AC, et al. A sham-controlled trial of a 5-day course of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation of the unaffected hemisphere in stroke patients. Stroke. 2006;37:2115-2122.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
107.Emara, TH, Moustafa, RR, Elnahas, NM, et al. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation at 1 Hz and 5 Hz produces sustained improvement in motor function and disability after ischaemic stroke. Eur J Neurol. 2010;17:1203-1209.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
108.Takeuchi, N, Tada, T, Toshima, M, Matsuo, Y, Ikoma, K. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation over bilateral hemispheres enhances motor function and training effect of paretic hand in patients after stroke. J Rehabil Med. 2009;41:1049-1054.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
109.Conforto, AB, Anjos, SM, Saposnik, G, et al. Transcranial magnetic stimulation in mild to severe hemiparesis early after stroke: a proof of principle and novel approach to improve motor function. J Neurol. 2012;259:1399-1405.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
110.Park, E, Kim, YH, Chang, WH, Kwon, TG, Shin, YI. Interhemispheric modulation of dual-mode, noninvasive brain stimulation on motor function. Ann Rehabil Med. 2014;38:297-303.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
111.Malcolm, MP, Triggs, WJ, Light, KE, et al. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation as an adjunct to constraint-induced therapy: an exploratory randomized controlled trial. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2007;86:707-715.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
112.Wassermann, EM . Risk and safety of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation: report and suggested guidelines from the International Workshop on the Safety of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation, June 5-7, 1996. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1998;108:1-16.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
113.Muellbacher, W, Ziemann, U, Boroojerdi, B, Hallett, M. Effects of low-frequency transcranial magnetic stimulation on motor excitability and basic motor behavior. Clin Neurophysiol. 2000;111(6):1002-1007.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
114.Houdayer, E, Degardin, A, Cassim, F, Bocquillon, P, Derambure, P, Devanne, H. The effects of low- and high-frequency repetitive TMS on the input/output properties of the human corticospinal pathway. Exp Brain Res. 2008;187:207-217.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
115.Heide, G, Witte, OW, Ziemann, U. Physiology of modulation of motor cortex excitability by low-frequency suprathreshold repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation. Exp Brain Res. 2006;171:26-34.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
116.de Jesus, DR, Favalli, GP, Hoppenbrouwers, SS, et al. Determining optimal rTMS parameters through changes in cortical inhibition. Clin Neurophysiol. 2014;125:755-762.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
117.Kantak, SS, Fisher, BE, Sullivan, KJ, Winstein, CJ. Effects of different doses of low frequency rTMS on motor corticospinal excitability. J Neurol Neurophysiol. 2010; 1:1000102. doi:10.4172/2155-9562.1000102
Google Scholar | Crossref
118.Pascual-Leone, A, Cohen, LG, Hallett, M. Cortical map plasticity in humans. Trends Neurosci. 1992;15:13-14.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
119.Liepert, J, Storch, P, Fritsch, A, Weiller, C. Motor cortex disinhibition in acute stroke. Clin Neurophysiol. 2000;111:671-676.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
120.Siebner, HR, Rothwell, J. Transcranial magnetic stimulation: new insights into representational cortical plasticity. Exp Brain Res. 2003;148:1-16.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
121.Ahdab, R, Ayache, SS, Brugieres, P, Farhat, WH, Lefaucheur, JP. The hand motor hotspot is not always located in the hand knob: a neuronavigated transcranial magnetic stimulation study. Brain Topogr. 2016;29:590-597.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
122.Liao, WW, Whitall, J, Wittenberg, GF, Barton, JE, McCombe Waller, S. Not all brain regions are created equal for improving bimanual coordination in individuals with chronic stroke. Clin Neurophysiol. 2019;130:1218-1230.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
123.Julkunen, P, Saisanen, L, Danner, N, et al. Comparison of navigated and non-navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation for motor cortex mapping, motor threshold and motor evoked potentials. Neuroimage. 2009;44:790-795.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
124.Saisanen, L, Julkunen, P, Niskanen, E, et al. Motor potentials evoked by navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation in healthy subjects. J Clin Neurophysiol. 2008;25:367-372.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
125.Sparing, R, Buelte, D, Meister, IG, Paus, T, Fink, GR. Transcranial magnetic stimulation and the challenge of coil placement: a comparison of conventional and stereotaxic neuronavigational strategies. Hum Brain Mapp. 2008;29:82-96.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI
126.Cincotta, M, Giovannelli, F, Borgheresi, A, et al. Optically tracked neuronavigation increases the stability of hand-held focal coil positioning: evidence from “transcranial” magnetic stimulation-induced electrical field measurements. Brain Stimul. 2010;3:119-123.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline

View all >

Source