Posts Tagged Training
[White Book] White Book on Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (PRM) in Europe. Chapter 9. Education and continuous professional development: shaping the future of PRM – Full Text PDF
In the context of the White Book of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (PRM), this paper deals with the education of PRM physicians in Europe. To acquire the wide field of competence needed, specialists in Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine have to undergo a well organised and appropriately structured training of adequate duration. In fact they are required to develop not only medical knowledge, but also competence in patient care, specific procedural skills, and attitudes towards interpersonal relationship and communication, profound understanding of the main principles of medical ethics and public health, ability to apply policies of care and prevention for disabled people, capacity to master strategies for reintegration of disabled people into society, apply principles of quality assurance and promote a practice-based continuous professional development. This paper provides updated detailed information about the education and training of specialists, delivers recommendations concerning the standards required at a European level, in agreement with the UEMS rules of creating a Common Training Framework, that consists of a common set of knowledge, skills and competencies for postgraduate training. The role of the European PRM Board is highlighted as a body aimed at ensuring the highest standards of medical training and health care across Europe and the harmonization of PRM physicians’ qualifications. To this scope, the theoretical knowledge necessary for the practice of PRM specialty and the core competencies (training outcomes) to be achieved at the end of training have been established and the postgraduate PRM core curriculum has been added. Undergraduate training of medical students is also focused, being considered a mandatory element for the growth of both PRM specialty and the medical community as a whole, mainly in front of the future challenges of the ageing population and the increase of disability in our continent. Finally, the problems of continuing professional development and medical education are faced in a PRM European perspective, and the role of the European Accreditation Council of Continuous Medical Education (EACCME) of UEMS is outlined.
Download Full Text PDF
via White Book on Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (PRM) in Europe. Chapter 9. Education and continuous professional development: shaping the future of PRM – European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine 2018 April;54(2):279-86 – Minerva Medica – Journals
Stroke is one of the leading causes of death overall the world . According to a report from the American Heart Association, around 8 million population experience stroke onset every year worldwide . It remains many sequalae including a pathological walking pattern. Impaired walking function refrains stroke survivors from not only activities of daily living but also social participation, which causes poststroke depression in stroke survivors . Unfortunately, the depressed mood also negatively influences on the recovery of daily functions –. Moreover, decreased mobility is associated with other diseases such as obesity which leads to comorbidity then raise the possibility to get recurrent strokes , . This might become a vicious circle and form a huge economic burden for governments .
[Abstract+References] Evidence for Training-Dependent Structural Neuroplasticity in Brain-Injured Patients: A Critical Review
Acquired brain injury (ABI) is associated with a range of cognitive and motor deficits, and poses a significant personal, societal, and economic burden. Rehabilitation programs are available that target motor skills or cognitive functioning. In this review, we summarize the existing evidence that training may enhance structural neuroplasticity in patients with ABI, as assessed using structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)–based techniques that probe microstructure or morphology. Twenty-five research articles met key inclusion criteria. Most trials measured relevant outcomes and had treatment benefits that would justify the risk of potential harm. The rehabilitation program included a variety of task-oriented movement exercises (such as facilitation therapy, postural control training), neurorehabilitation techniques (such as constraint-induced movement therapy) or computer-assisted training programs (eg, Cogmed program). The reviewed studies describe regional alterations in white matter architecture and/or gray matter volume with training. Only weak-to-moderate correlations were observed between improved behavioral function and structural changes. While structural MRI is a powerful tool for detection of longitudinal structural changes, specific measures about the underlying biological mechanisms are lacking. Continued work in this field may potentially see structural MRI metrics used as biomarkers to help guide treatment at the individual patient level.
|1.||O’Rance, L, Fortune, N. Disability in Australia: Acquired Brain Injury. Canberra, Australia: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare; 2007:1–24. Google Scholar|
|2.||Rabinowitz, A, Levin, HS. Cognitive sequale of traumatic brain injury. Psychiatr Clin North Am. 2014;37:1–11. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|3.||Kuhtz-Buschbeck, JP, Hoppe, B, Gölge, M, Dreesmann, M, Damm-Stünitz, U, Ritz, A. Sensorimotor recovery in children after traumatic brain injury: analyses of gait, gross motor, and fine motor skills. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2003;45:821–828. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|4.||Hayes, JP, Bigler, ED, Verfaellie, M. Traumatic brain injury as a disorder of brain connectivity. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2016;22:120–137. doi:10.1017/S1355617715000740. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|5.||Drijkoningen, D, Caeyenberghs, K, Vander Linden, C, Van Herpe, K, Duysens, J, Swinnen, SP. Associations between muscle strength asymmetry and impairments in gait and posture in young brain-injured patients. J Neurotrauma. 2015;32:1324–1332. doi:10.1089/neu.2014.3787. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|6.||Nocentini, U, Bozzali, M, Spanò, B. Exploration of the relationships between regional grey matter atrophy and cognition in multiple sclerosis. Brain Imaging Behav. 2014;8:378–386. doi:10.1007/s11682-012-9170-7. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|7.||Hulkower, MB, Poliak, DB, Rosenbaum, SB, Zimmerman, ME, Lipton, ML. A decade of DTI in traumatic brain injury: 10 years and 100 articles later. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2013;34:2064–2074. doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3395. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|8.||Caeyenberghs, K, Wenderoth, N, Smits-Engelsman, BC, Sunaert, S, Swinnen, SP. Neural correlates of motor dysfunction in children with traumatic brain injury: exploration of compensatory recruitment patterns. Brain. 2009;132(pt 3):684–694. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|9.||Chen, H, Epstein, J, Stern, E. Neural plasticity after acquired brain injury: evidence from functional neuroimaging. PM R. 2010;2(12 suppl 2):S306–S312. doi:10.1016/j.pmrj.2010.10.006. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|10.||Choo, PL, Gallagher, HL, Morris, J, Pomeroy, VM, van Wijck, F. Correlations between arm motor behavior and brain function following bilateral arm training after stroke: a systematic review. Brain Behav. 2015;5:e00411. doi: 10.1002/brb3.411. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|11.||Matthews, PM, Johansen-Berg, H, Reddy, H. Non-invasive mapping of brain functions and brain recovery: applying lessons from cognitive neuroscience to neurorehabilitation. Restor Neurol Neurosci. 2004;22:245–260. Google Scholar, Medline|
|12.||Prosperini, L, Piattella, MC, Giannì, C, Pantano, P. Functional and structural brain plasticity enhanced by motor and cognitive rehabilitation in multiple sclerosis. Neural Plast. 2015;2015:481574. doi:10.1155/2015/481574. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|13.||Reid, LB, Boyd, RN, Cunnington, R, Rose, SE. Interpreting intervention induced neuroplasticity with fMRI: the case for multimodal imaging strategies. Neural Plast. 2016;2016:2643491. doi:10.1155/2016/2643491.Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|14.||Richards, LG, Stewart, KC, Woodbury, ML, Senesac, C, Cauraugh, JH. Movement-dependent stroke recovery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of TMS and fMRI evidence. Neuropsychologia. 2008;46:3–11. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|15.||Mechelli, A, Crinion, JT, Noppeney, U. Neurolinguistics: structural plasticity in the bilingual brain. Nature. 2004;431:757. doi:10.1038/431757a. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|16.||Takeuchi, H, Sekiguchi, A, Taki, Y. Training of working memory impacts structural connectivity. J Neurosci. 2010;30:3297–3303. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4611-09.2010. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|17.||van Tulder, M, Furlan, A, Bombardier, C, Bouter, L; Editorial Board of the Cochrane Collaboration Back Review Group. Updated method guidelines for systematic reviews in the cochrane collaboration back review group. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2003;28:1290–1299. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|18.||Fritz, NE, Cheek, FM, Nichols-Larsen, DS. Motor-cognitive dual-task training in persons with neurologic disorders: a systematic review. J Neurol Phys Ther. 2015;39:142–153. doi:10.1097/NPT.0000000000000090. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|19.||Guzmán, J, Esmail, R, Karjalainen, K, Malmivaara, A, Irvin, E, Bombardier, C. Multidisciplinary rehabilitation for chronic low back pain: systematic review. BMJ. 2001;322:1511–1516. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|20.||Karjalainen, K, Malmivaara, A, van Tulder, M. Multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation for subacute low back pain in working-age adults: a systematic review within the framework of the Cochrane Collaboration Back Review Group. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2001;26:262–269. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|21.||Gauthier, LV, Taub, E, Perkins, C, Ortmann, M, Mark, VW, Uswatte, G. Remodeling the brain: plastic structural brain changes produced by different motor therapies after stroke. Stroke. 2008;39:1520–1525. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.107.502229. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|22.||Schlaug, G, Marchina, S, Norton, A. Evidence for plasticity in white-matter tracts of patients with chronic Broca’s aphasia undergoing intense intonation-based speech therapy. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2009;1169:385–394. doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.2009.04587.x. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|23.||Breier, J, Juranek, J, Papanicolaou, A. Changes in maps of language function and the integrity of the arcuate fasciculus after therapy for chronic aphasia. Neurocase. 2011;17:506–517. doi:10.1080/13554794.2010.547505. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|24.||Caria, A, Weber, C, Brötz, D. Chronic stroke recovery after combined BCI training and physiotherapy: a case report. Psychophysiology. 2011;48:578–582. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.2010.01117.x. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|25.||Nordvik, JE, Schanke, AK, Walhovd, K, Fjell, A, Grydeland, H, Landrø, NI. Exploring the relationship between white matter microstructure and working memory functioning following stroke: a single case study of computerized cognitive training. Neurocase. 2012;18:139–151. doi:10.1080/13554794.2011.568501.Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|26.||Borstad, AL, Bird, T, Choi, S, Goodman, L, Schmalbrock, P, Nichols-Larsen, DS. Sensorimotor training induced neural reorganization after stroke: a case series. J Neurol Phys Ther. 2013;37:27–36. doi:10.1097/NPT.0b013e318283de0d. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|27.||Lazaridou, A, Astrakas, L, Mintzopoulos, D. Diffusion tensor and volumetric magnetic resonance Imaging using an MR-compatible hand-induced robotic device suggests training-induced neuroplasticity in patients with chronic stroke. Int J Mol Med. 2013;32:995–1000. doi:10.3892/ijmm.2013.1476. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|28.||Särkämö, T, Ripollés, P, Vepsäläinen, H. Structural changes induced by daily music listening in the recovering brain after middle cerebral artery stroke: a voxel-based morphometry study. Front Hum Neurosci. 2014;8:245. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2014.00245. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|29.||Wan, CY, Zheng, X, Marchina, S, Norton, A, Schlaug, G. Intensive therapy induces contralateral white matter changes in chronic stroke patients with Broca’s aphasia. Brain Lang. 2014;136:1–7. doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2014.03.011. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|30.||Fan, YT, Lin, KC, Liu, HL, Chen, YL, Wu, CY. Changes in structural integrity are correlated with motor and functional recovery after post-stroke rehabilitation. Restor Neurol Neurosci. 2015;33:835–844. doi:10.3233/RNN-150523. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|31.||Young, BM, Stamm, JM, Song, J. Brain-computer interface training and stroke affects patterns of brain-behavior relationships in corticospinal motor fibers. Front Hum Neurosci. 2016;10:457. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|32.||Wilkins, KB, Owen, M, Ingo, C, Carmona, C, Dewald, J, Yao, J. Neural plasticity in moderate to severe chronic stroke following a device-assisted task-specific arm/hand intervention Front Neurol. 2017;8:284. doi:10.33389/fneur.2017.00284. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|33.||Yang, HE, Kyeong, S, Lee, SH. Structural and functional improvements due to robot-assisted gait training in the stroke-injured brain. Neurosci Lett. 2017;637:114–119. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|34.||Ibrahim, I, Tintera, J, Skoch, A. Fractional anisotropy and mean diffusivity in the corpus callosum of patients with multiple sclerosis: the effect of physiotherapy. Neuroradiology. 2011;53:917–926. doi:10.1007/s00234-011-0879-6. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|35.||Filippi, M, Riccitelli, G, Mattioli, F. Multiple sclerosis: effects of cognitive rehabilitation on structural and functional MR imaging measures—an explorative study. Radiology. 2012;262:932–940. doi:10.1148/radiol.11111299. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|36.||Bonzano, L, Tacchino, A, Brichetto, G. Upper limb motor rehabilitation impacts white matter microstructure in multiple sclerosis. Neuroimage. 2014;90:107–116. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.12.025. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|37.||Prosperini, L, Fanelli, F, Petsas, N. Multiple sclerosis: changes in microarchitecture of white matter tracts after training with a video game balance board. Radiology. 2014;273:529–538. doi:10.1148/radiol.14140168. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|38.||Rasova, K, Prochazkova, M, Tintera, J, Ibrahim, I, Zimova, D, Stetkarova, I. Motor programme activating therapy influences adaptive brain functions in multiple sclerosis: clinical and MRI study. Int J Rehabil Res. 2015;38:49–54. doi:10.1097/MRR.0000000000000090. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|39.||Ernst, A, Sourty, M, Roquet, D. Functional and structural cerebral changes in key brain regions after facilitation programme for episodic future thought in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis patients. Brain Cogn. 2016;105:34–45. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|40.||Cruickshank, TM, Thompson, JA, Domínguez, D. The effect of multidisciplinary rehabilitation on brain structure and cognition in Huntington’s disease: an exploratory study. Brain Behav. 2015;5:e00312. doi:10.1002/brb3.312. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|41.||Metzler-Baddeley, C, Cantera, J, Coulthard, E, Rosser, A, Jones, DK, Baddeley, RJ. Improved executive function and callosal white matter microstructure after rhythm exercise in Huntington’s disease. J Huntingtons Dis. 2014;3:273–283. doi:10.3233/JHD-140113. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|42.||Sehm, B, Taubert, M, Conde, V. Structural brain plasticity in Parkinson’s disease induced by balance training. Neurobiol Aging. 2014;35:232–239. doi:10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2013.06.021. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|43.||Díez-Cirarda, M, Ojeda, N, Peña, J. Increased brain connectivity and activation after cognitive rehabilitation in Parkinson’s disease: a randomized controlled trial. Brain Imaging Behav. 2017;11:1640–1651. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|44.||Burciu, RG, Fritsche, N, Granert, O. Brain changes associated with postural training in patients with cerebellar degeneration: a voxel-based morphometry study. J Neurosci. 2013;33:4594–4604. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3381-12.2013. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|45.||Han, K, Davis, RA, Chapman, SB, Krawczyk, DC. Strategy-based reasoning training modulates cortical thickness and resting-state functional connectivity in adults with chronic traumatic brain injury. Brain Behav. 2017;7:e00687. doi:10.1002/brb3.687. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|46.||Cohen, J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Hilsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum; 1988. Google Scholar|
|47.||Borenstein, M, Hedges, LV, Higgins, JPT, Rothstein, HR. Multiple outcomes or time-points within a study. In: Borenstein, M, ed. Introduction to Meta-Analysis. Chichester, England: Wiley; 2009:225–238. Google Scholar, Crossref|
|48.||Thomas, C, Baker, CI. Teaching an adult brain new tricks: a critical review of evidence for training-dependent structural plasticity in humans. Neuroimage. 2013;73:225–236. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.03.069. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|49.||Smith, S, Rao, A, De Stefano, N. Longitudinal and cross-sectional analysis of atrophy in Alzheimer’s disease: cross-validation of BSI, SIENA and SIENAX. Neuroimage. 2007;36:1200–1206. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.04.035. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|50.||Heiervang, E, Behrens, TE, Mackay, CE, Robson, MD, Johansen-Berg, H. Between session reproducibility and between subject variability of diffusion MR and tractography measures. Neuroimage. 2006;33:867–877. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.07.037. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|51.||Wakana, S, Caprihan, A, Panzenboeck, MM. Reproducibility of quantitative tractography methods applied to cerebral white matter. Neuroimage. 2007;36:630–644. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.02.049. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|52.||Scholz, J, Klein, MC, Behrens, TE, Johansen-Berg, H. Training induces changes in white-matter architecture. Nat Neurosci. 2009;12:1370–1371. doi:10.1038/nn.2412. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|53.||Taubert, M, Draganski, B, Anwander, A. Dynamic properties of human brain structure: learning-related changes in cortical areas and associated fiber connections. J Neurosci. 2010;30:11670–11677. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2567-10.2010. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|54.||Hofstetter, S, Tavor, I, Tzur Moryosef, S, Assaf, Y. Short-term learning induces white matter plasticity in the fornix. J Neurosci. 2013;33:12844–11280. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4520-12.2013. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|55.||Cercignani, M, Bammer, R, Sormani, MP, Fazekas, F, Filippi, M. Inter-sequence and inter-imaging unit variability of diffusion tensor MR imaging histogram-derived metrics of the brain in healthy volunteers. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2003;24:638–643. Google Scholar, Medline|
|56.||Price, R, Axel, L, Morgan, T. Quality assurance methods and phantoms for magnetic resonance imaging: report of AAPM Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Task Group No. 1. Med Phys. 1990;17:287–295. doi:10.1118/1.596566. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|57.||Bookstein, FL. “Voxel-based morphometry” should not be used with imperfectly registered images. Neuroimage. 2001;14:1454–1462. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|58.||Thompson, WK, Holland, D; Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. Bias in tensor based morphometry Stat-ROI measures may result in unrealistic power estimates. Neuroimage. 2011;57:1–4. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.11.092. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|59.||Zatorre, RJ, Fields, RD, Johansen-Berg, H. Plasticity in gray and white: neuroimaging changes in brain structure during learning. Nat Neurosci. 2012;15:528–536. doi:10.1038/nn.3045. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|60.||Eriksson, S, Free, S, Thom, M. Quantitative grey matter histological measures do not correlate with grey matter probability values from in vivo MRI in the temporal lobe. J Neurosci Methods. 2009;181:111–118. doi:10.1016/j.jneumeth.2009.05.001. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|61.||Jones, DK, Knösche, TR, Turner, R. White matter integrity, fiber count, and other fallacies: the do’s and don’ts of diffusion MRI. Neuroimage. 2011;73:239–254. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.06.081. Google Scholar, Crossref|
|62.||Jeurissen, B, Leemans, A, Jones, DK, Tournier, JD, Sijbers, J. Probabilistic fiber tracking using the residual bootstrap with constrained spherical deconvolution. Hum Brain Mapp. 2011;32:461–479. doi:10.1002/hbm.21032. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|63.||Caeyenberghs, K, Metzler-Baddeley, C, Foley, S, Jones, DK. Dynamics of the human structural connectome underlying working memory training. J Neurosci. 2016;36:4056–4066. doi:10.1523/jneurosci.1973-15.2016. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|64.||Metzler-Baddeley, C, Foley, S, de Santis, S. Dynamics of white matter plasticity underlying working memory training: multimodal evidence from diffusion MRI and relaxometry. J Cogn Neurosci. 2017;29:1509–1520. doi:10.1162/jocn_a_01127. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|65.||Assaf, Y, Basser, PJ. Composite hindered and restricted model of diffusion (CHARMED) MR imaging of the human brain. Neuroimage. 2005;27:48–58. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.03.042. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|66.||Deoni, SC, Rutt, BK, Jones, DK. Investigating exchange and multicomponent relaxation in fully-balanced steady-state free precession imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2008;27:1421–1429. doi:10.1002/jmri.21079. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
via Evidence for Training-Dependent Structural Neuroplasticity in Brain-Injured Patients: A Critical Review – Karen Caeyenberghs, Adam Clemente, Phoebe Imms, Gary Egan, Darren R. Hocking, Alexander Leemans, Claudia Metzler-Baddeley, Derek K. Jones, Peter H. Wilson, 2018
[Abstract+References] SMART Arm Training With Outcome-Triggered Electrical Stimulation in Subacute Stroke Survivors With Severe Arm Disability: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Background. Stroke survivors with severe upper limb disability need opportunities to engage in task-oriented practice to achieve meaningful recovery. Objective. To compare the effect of SMART Arm training, with or without outcome-triggered electrical stimulation to usual therapy, on arm function for stroke survivors with severe upper limb disability undergoing inpatient rehabilitation. Methods. A prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial was conducted with 3 parallel groups, concealed allocation, assessor blinding and intention-to-treat analysis. Fifty inpatients within 4 months of stroke with severe upper limb disability were randomly allocated to 60 min/d, 5 days a week for 4 weeks of (1) SMART Arm with outcome-triggered electrical stimulation and usual therapy, (2) SMART Arm alone and usual therapy, or (3) usual therapy. Assessment occurred at baseline (0 weeks), posttraining (4 weeks), and follow-up (26 and 52 weeks). The primary outcome measure was Motor Assessment Scale item 6 (MAS6) at posttraining. Results. All groups demonstrated a statistically (P < .001) and clinically significant improvement in arm function at posttraining (MAS6 change ≥1 point) and at 52 weeks (MAS6 change ≥2 points). There were no differences in improvement in arm function between groups (P= .367). There were greater odds of a higher MAS6 score in SMART Arm groups as compared with usual therapy alone posttraining (SMART Arm stimulation generalized odds ratio [GenOR] = 1.47, 95%CI = 1.23-1.71) and at 26 weeks (SMART Arm alone GenOR = 1.31, 95% CI = 1.05-1.57). Conclusion. SMART Arm training supported a clinically significant improvement in arm function, which was similar to usual therapy. All groups maintained gains at 12 months.
|1.||Houwink, A, Nijland, RH, Geurts, AC, Kwakkel, G. Functional recovery of the paretic upper limb after stroke: who regains hand capacity? Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2013;94:839–844. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|2.||Broeks, JG, Lankhorst, GJ, Rumping, K, Prevo, AJ. The long-term outcome of arm function after stroke: results of a follow-up study. Disabil Rehabil. 1999;21:357–364. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|3.||Wolf, SL, Kwakkel, G, Bayley, M, McDonnell, MN. Upper Extremity Stroke Algorithm Working Group. Best practice for arm recovery post stroke: an international application. Physiotherapy. 2016;102:1–4. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|4.||Kleim, JA. Neural plasticity and neurorehabilitation: teaching the new brain old tricks. J Commun Disord. 2011;44:521–528. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|5.||Pollock, A, Farmer, SE, Brady, MC. Interventions for improving upper limb function after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;(11):CD010820. Google Scholar, Medline|
|6.||Zondervan, DK, Augsburger, R, Bodenhoefer, B, Friedman, N, Reinkensmeyer, DJ, Cramer, SC. Machine-based, self-guided home therapy for individuals with severe arm impairment after stroke:a randomized controlled trial. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2015;29:395–406. Google Scholar, Link|
|7.||Howlett, OA, Lannin, NA, Ada, L, McKinstry, C. Functional electrical stimulation improves activity after stroke: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2015;96:934–943. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|8.||McCabe, J, Monkiewicz, M, Holcomb, J, Pundik, S, Daly, JJ. Comparison of robotics, functional electrical stimulation, and motor learning methods for treatment of persistent upper extremity dysfunction after stroke: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2015;96:981–990. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|9.||Barker, RN, Brauer, SG, Carson, RG. Training of reaching in stroke survivors with severe and chronic upper limb paresis using a novel nonrobotic device: a randomized clinical trial. Stroke. 2008;39:1800–1807. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|10.||Hayward, KS, Barker, RN, Brauer, SG, Lloyd, D, Horsley, SA, Carson, RG. SMART Arm with outcome-triggered electrical stimulation: a pilot randomized clinical trial. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2013;20:289–298. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|11.||Barker, RN, Brauer, S, Carson, R. Training-induced changes in the pattern of triceps to biceps activation during reaching tasks after chronic and severe stroke. Exp Brain Res. 2009;196:483–496. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|12.||Barker, RN, Brauer, SG, Barry, BK, Gill, TJ, Carson, RG. Training-induced modifications of corticospinal reactivity in severely affected stroke survivors. Exp Brain Res. 2012;221:211–221. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|13.||Zeiler, SR, Krakauer, JW. The interaction between training and plasticity in the post-stroke brain. Curr Opin Neurol. 2013;26:609–616. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|14.||Hayward, KS, Neibling, BA, Barker, RN. Self-administered, home-based SMART (Sensorimotor Active Rehabilitation Training) arm training: a single-case report. Am J Occup Ther. 2015;69:6904210020p1-8. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|15.||Wahl, AS, Schwab, ME. Finding an optimal rehabilitation paradigm after stroke: enhancing fiber growth and training of the brain at the right moment. Front Hum Neurosci. 2014;8:381. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|16.||Hatam, SM, Saussez, G, Della Faille, M. 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, Medline|
|17.||Murphy, TH, Corbett, D. Plasticity during stroke recovery: from synapse to behaviour. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2009;10:861–872. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|18.||Kwah, LK, Harvey, LA, Diong, JH, Herbert, RD. Half of the adults who present to hospital with stroke develop at least one contracture within six months: an observational study. J Physiother. 2012;58:41–47. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|19.||Adey-Wakeling, Z, Arima, H, Crotty, M. Incidence and associations of hemiplegic shoulder pain poststroke: prospective population-based study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2015;96:241.e1–247.e1. Google Scholar, Crossref|
|20.||Kleim, JA. Neural Plasticity: Foundation for Neurorehabilita-tion. Scottsdale, AZ: Tanas; 2012. Google Scholar|
|21.||Brauer, SG, Hayward, KS, Carson, RG, Cresswell, AG, Barker, RN. The efficacy of SMART arm training early after stroke for stroke survivors with severe upper limb disability: a protocol for a randomised controlled trial. BMC Neurol. 2013;13:71. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|22.||Malouin, F, Pichard, L, Bonneau, C, Durand, A, Corriveau, D. Evaluating motor recovery early after stroke: comparison of the Fugl-Meyer Assessment and the Motor Assessment Scale. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1994;75:1206–1212. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|23.||Hayward, KS, Kuys, SS, Barker, RN, Brauer, SG. Can stroke survivors with severe upper arm disability achieve clinically important change in arm function during inpatient rehabilitation? A multicentre, prospective, observational study. NeuroRehabilitation. 2014;35:17–23. Google Scholar, Medline|
|24.||Bohannon, RW, Smith, MB. Inter-rater reliability of a modified Ashworth scale of muscle spasticity. Phys Ther. 1987;67:206–207. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|25.||Ritchie, DM, Boyle, JA, McInnes, JM. Clinical studies with an articular index for the assessment of joint tenderness in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Q J Med. 1968;37:393–406. Google Scholar, Medline|
|26.||Khan, A, Chien, CW, Brauer, SG. Rasch-based scoring offered more precision in differentiating patient groups in measuring upper limb function. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66:681–687. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|27.||Duncan, PW, Wallace, D, Lai, SM, Johnson, D, Emberston, S, Laster, LJ. The Stroke Impact Scale Version 2.0. Evaluation of the reliability, validity and sensitivity to change. Stroke. 1999;30:2131–2140. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|28.||Uswatte, G, Taub, E, Morris, D, Light, K, Thompson, PA. The Motor Activity Log-28: assessing daily use of the hemiparetic arm after stroke. Neurology. 2006;67:1189–1194. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|29.||Helm-Estabrooks, N. Cognitive Linguistic Quick Test. Examiner’s Manual. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation, Harcourt Assessment Company; 2001. Google Scholar|
|30.||Lincoln, NB, Jackson, JM, Adams, SA. Reliability and revision of the Nottingham Sensory Assessment for stroke patients. Physiotherapy. 1998:358–365. Google Scholar|
|31.||Winters, C, Heymans, MW, van Wegen, EE, Kwakkel, G. How to design clinical rehabilitation trials for the upper paretic limb early post stroke? Trials. 2016;17:468. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|32.||van der Lee, JH, Wagenaar, RC, Lankhorst, GJ, Vogelaar, TW, Deville, WL, Bouter, LM. Forced use of the upper extremity in chronic stroke patients—results from a single-blind randomized clinical trial. Stroke. 1999;30:2369–2375. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|33.||Hayward, KS, Kuys, SS, Barker, RN, Brauer, SG. Clinically important improvements in motor function are achievable during inpatient rehabilitation by stroke patients with severe motor disability: a prospective observational study. NeuroRehabilitation. 2014;34:773–779. Google Scholar, Medline|
|34.||Churilov, L, Arnup, S, Johns, H. An improved method for simple, assumption-free ordinal analysis of the modified Rankin Scale using generalized odds ratios. Int J Stroke. 2014;9:999–1005. Google Scholar, Link|
|35.||Hayward, KS, Barker, RN, Wiseman, AH, Brauer, SG. Dose and content of training provided to stroke survivors with severe upper limb disability undertaking inpatient rehabilitation: an observational study. Brain Impairment. 2013;14:392–405. Google Scholar, Crossref|
|36.||Shirzad, N, Van der Loos, HFM. Evaluating the user experience of exercising reaching motions with a robot that predicts desired movement difficulty. J Mot Behav. 2016;48:31–46. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|37.||Bernstein, NA. The Co-ordination and Regulation of Movement. Oxford, England: Pergamon Press; 1967. Google Scholar|
|38.||Krakauer, JW. Rethinking motor rehabilitation after stroke. Paper presented at: International Conference on Virtual Rehabilitation; June 9-12, 2015; Valencia, Spain. Google Scholar|
|39.||Guadagnoli, MA, Lee, TD. Challenge point: a framework for conceptualizing the effects of various practice conditions in motor learning. J Mot Behav. 2004;36:212–224. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|40.||Winters, C, van Wegen, EE, Daffertshofer, A, Kwakkel, G. Generalizability of the proportional recovery model for the upper extremity after an ischemic stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2015;29:614–622. Google Scholar, Link, ISI|
|41.||Schneider, EJ, Lannin, NA, Ada, L, Schmidt, J. Increasing the amount of usual rehabilitation improves activity after stroke: a systematic review. J Physiother. 2016;62:182–187. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|42.||Krakauer, JW, Marshall, RS. The proportional recovery rule for stroke revisited. Ann Neurol. 2015;78:845–847. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|43.||Duncan, PW, Goldstein, LB, Matchar, D, Divine, GW, Feussner, J. Measurement of motor recovery after stroke—outcome assessment and sample-size requirements. Stroke. 1992;23:1084–1089. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|44.||Birkenmeier, RL, Prager, EM, Lang, CE. Translating animal doses of task-specific training to people with chronic stroke in 1-hour therapy sessions: a proof-of-concept study. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2010;24:620–635. Google Scholar, Link|
|45.||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|
|46.||Magill, RA, Anderson, D. Motor Learning and Control: Concepts and Applications. 10th ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 2014. Google Scholar|
|47.||Lee, JY, Ready, EA, Davis, EN, Doyle, PC. Purposefulness as a critical factor in functioning, disability and health. Clin Rehabil. 2017;31:1005–1018. Google Scholar, Link|
|48.||Bernhardt, J, Borschmann, K, Boyd, L. Moving rehabilitation research forward: developing consensus statements for rehabilitation and recovery research. Int J Stroke. 2016;11:454–458. Google Scholar, Link, ISI|
|49.||Hayward, KS. It is time to redefine recovery for individuals with severe upper limb impairment after stroke. IJTR Int J Ther Rehabil. 2016;23:256–257. Google Scholar, Crossref|
|50.||Krebs, HI, Hogan, N. Therapeutic robotics: a technology push. Stroke rehabilitation is being aided by robots that guide movement of shoulders and elbows, wrists, hands, arms and ankles to significantly improve recovery of patients. Proc IEEE Inst Electr Electron Eng. 2006;94:1727–1738. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|51.||de Kroon, JR, van der Lee, JH, Ijzerman, MJ, Lankhorst, GJ. Therapeutic electrical stimulation to improve motor control and functional abilities of the upper extremity after stroke: a systematic review. Clin Rehabil. 2002;16:350–360. Google Scholar, Link|
|52.||Cauraugh, J, Light, K, Kim, S, Thigpen, M, Behrman, A. Chronic motor dysfunction after stroke: recovering wrist and finger extension by electromyography-triggered neuromuscular stimulation. Stroke. 2000;31:1360–1364. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|53.||Veerbeek, JM, Langbroek-Amersfoort, AC, van Wegen, EE, Meskers, CG, Kwakkel, G. Effects of robot-assisted therapy for the upper limb after stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2017;31:107–121. Google Scholar, Link|
|54.||Nascimento, LR, Michaelsen, SM, Ada, L, Polese, JC, Teixeira-Salmela, LF. Cyclical electrical stimulation increases strength and improves activity after stroke: a systematic review. J Physiother. 2014;60:22–30. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|55.||Kwakkel, G, Kollen, BJ, van der Grond, J, Prevo, AJ. Probability of regaining dexterity in the flaccid upper limb: impact of severity of paresis and time since onset in acute stroke. Stroke. 2003;34:2181–2186. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
|56.||Dromerick, AW, Edwardson, MA, Edwards, DF. Critical periods after stroke study: translating animal stroke recovery experiments into a clinical trial. Front Hum Neurosci. 2015;9:231. Google Scholar, Crossref, Medline|
via SMART Arm Training With Outcome-Triggered Electrical Stimulation in Subacute Stroke Survivors With Severe Arm Disability: A Randomized Controlled TrialNeurorehabilitation and Neural Repair – Ruth N. Barker, Kathryn S. Hayward, Richard G. Carson, David Lloyd, Sandra G. Brauer, 2017
[Abstract] Development of a Minimal-Intervention-Based Admittance Control Strategy for Upper Extremity Rehabilitation Exoskeleton
[Abstract] EEG-guided robotic mirror therapy system for lower limb rehabilitation – IEEE Conference Publication
Imagine that the New Year has just begun. You’ve made a resolution to improve your physical fitness. In particular, you want to improve your muscle strength. You’ve heard that people with stronger muscles live longer and have less difficulty standing, walking, and using the toilet when they get older (Rantanen et al. 1999; Ruiz et al. 2008). So, you join a fitness centre and hire a personal trainer. The trainer assesses your maximal strength, and then guides you through a 4-week program that involves lifting weights which are about 80% of your maximum.
Sure enough, after the program, you become stronger (probably around 20% stronger) (Carroll et al. 2011). You think this is great – and it is! You are so excited, you decide to stand in front of your mirror, flex your biceps, and take a selfie (your plan is to post the picture to Facebook to show your friends how much bigger your muscles got). However, after examining the picture, you realise your muscles did not get bigger. Or perhaps they did get a little bigger, but not enough to explain your substantial improvement in strength. You are somewhat disappointed in this, but then you remember your goal was to get stronger, not necessarily bigger, so you post the picture, anyway.
Interestingly, the observations you made are completely consistent with the scientific literature. Within the first weeks of strength training, muscle strength can improve without a change in the size or architecture of the muscle (e.g., Blazevich et al. 2007). Consequently, researchers have speculated that initial improvements in muscle strength from strength training are due primarily to changes in the central nervous system. One hypothesis has been that strength training helps the nervous system learn how to better “drive” or communicate with muscles. This ability is termed voluntary activation, and it can be tested by stimulating the motor area of an individual’s brain while they perform a maximal contraction (Todd et al. 2003). If the stimulation produces extra muscle force, it means that the individual’s nervous system was not maximally activating their muscles. Currently, there is no consensus as to whether voluntary activation can actually be improved by strength training.
Therefore, we conducted a randomised, controlled trial in which one group of participants completed four weeks of strength training, while a control group did not complete the training (Nuzzo et al. in press). For the group who performed the training, each exercise session consisted of four sets of strong contractions of the elbow flexor muscles (i.e., the muscles that bend the elbow, such as the biceps). Before and after the four week intervention, both groups were tested for muscle strength, voluntary activation, and several other measures. The participants were healthy, university-aged, and they had limited or no experience with strength training.
WHAT DID WE FIND?
Prior to the intervention, the strength training and control groups had similar levels of muscle strength and activation of the elbow flexor muscles. After the intervention, the group who performed the strength training improved their strength by 13%. They also improved their voluntary activation from 88.7% to 93.4%. The control group did not improve muscle strength or voluntary activation.
SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPLICATIONS
The results from our study show that four weeks of strength training improves the brain’s ability to “drive” the elbow flexor muscles to produce their maximal force. This helps to explain how muscles can become stronger, without a change in muscle size or architecture. Moreover, the results suggest that clinicians should consider strength training as a treatment for patients with motor impairments (e.g., stroke), as these individuals are likely to have poor voluntary activation (Bowden et al. 2014).
Nuzzo JL, Barry BK, Jones MD, Gandevia SC, Taylor JL. Effects of four weeks of strength training on the corticomotoneuronal pathway. Med Sci Sports Exerc, doi: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000001367.
Blazevich AJ, Gill ND, Deans N, Zhou S. Lack of human muscle architectural adaptation after short-term strength training. Muscle Nerve 35: 78-86.
Bowden JL, Taylor JL, McNulty PA. Voluntary activation is reduced in both the more- and less-affected upper limbs after unilateral stroke.Front Neurol 5: 239, 2014.
Carroll TJ, Selvanayagam VS, Riek S, Semmler RG. Neural adaptations to strength training: moving beyond transcranial magnetic stimulation and reflex studies. Acta Physiol 202: 119-140, 2011.
Rantanen T, Guralnik JM, Foley D, Masaki K, Leveille S, Curb JD, White L. Midline hand grip strength as a predictor of old age disability.JAMA 281: 558-560, 1999.
Ruiz JR, Sui X, Lobelo F, Morrow Jr. JR, Jackson AW, Sjöström M, Blair SN. Association between muscular strength and mortality in men: prospective cohort study. BMJ 337: a439, 2008.
Todd G, Taylor JL, Gandevia SC. Measurement of voluntary activation of fresh and fatigued human muscles using transcranial magnetic stimulation. J Physiol 555: 661-671, 2003.
Jim Nuzzo is a Postdoctoral Fellow at Neuroscience Research Australia (NeuRA). His research investigates how strength training alters the neural connections between the brain and muscles. Click here to read Jim’s other blogs.
[Abstract] Robot-assisted arm training in physical and virtual environments: A case study of long-term chronic stroke
[Abstract] Virtual reality and non-invasive brain stimulation in stroke: How effective is their combination for upper limb motor improvement?
[Abstract] The eWrist — A wearable wrist exoskeleton with sEMG-based force control for stroke rehabilitation.