Upper Limb Obstacle Avoidance Behavior in Individuals With Stroke. (February 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Baniña, Melanie C.; Mullick, Aditi A.; McFadyen, Bradford J.; Levin, Mindy F.
• Is Part Of: Neurorehabilitation & neural repair. Volume 31:Number 2(2017)
• Page Start: 133
• Page End: 146
• Publication Date: 2017-02
• Subjects: motor control -- reaching -- arm -- recovery; Nervous system -- Diseases -- Patients -- Rehabilitation -- Periodicals; Brain damage -- Patients -- Rehabilitation -- Periodicals; Spinal cord -- Wounds and injuries -- Patients -- Rehabilitation -- Periodicals; Nervous system -- Regeneration -- Periodicals; Neuroplasticity -- Periodicals; 616.804305
• DOI: 10.1177/1545968316662527
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1545-9683

Abstract

Background. Upper limb (UL) poststroke hemiparesis commonly leads to chronic disability. Despite moderate-to-good clinical recovery, many patients with UL hemiparesis still do not fully use their arm in daily tasks. Decreased arm use may be related to deficits in performance of more complex movement than what is usually assessed clinically. Objective. To identify differences between poststroke and nondisabled control subjects in making complex corrective movements to avoid an obstacle in the reaching path. Methods. Subjects rapidly reached for a juice bottle on a refrigerator shelf with their hemiparetic or dominant (controls) arm viewed in a large-screen projected 3D virtual environment. In random trials, a sliding door partially obstructed the reaching path. A successful trial was one in which subjects touched the bottle without their arm or hand hitting the door. Results. Fewer participants with stroke (12%) were successful at a 65% success rate in avoiding the door compared to controls (42%). Subjects with stroke also initiated corrections later (further) in the reaching path (100.7 ± 77.6 mm) compared to controls (51.6 ± 31.0 mm) resulting in a reduced margin of error. While both groups used similar endpoint movement strategies for obstructed reaching, subjects with stroke used less elbow and more trunk movement. Participants who reported being more confident using their hemiparetic arm had higher success rates. Conclusion. Arm movement deficits can be identified when complex tasks are evaluated. Deficits in higher-order motor function such as obstacle avoidance behavior may decrease actual arm use in individuals with mild-to-moderate hemiparesis and should be evaluated in routine clinical practice.