http://www.jneuroengrehab.com/content/12/1/64
1 FR3636 CNRS, Université Paris Descartes, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Paris, 75006, France
2 Service de Médecine Physique et de Réadaptation, Université Paris Descartes, Hôpital Sainte-Anne, Paris, 75014, France
3 Centre de Psychiatrie et Neurosciences, Inserm U894, Paris, 75014, France
4 Université Paris Diderot, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Paris, 75013, France
2 Service de Médecine Physique et de Réadaptation, Université Paris Descartes, Hôpital Sainte-Anne, Paris, 75014, France
3 Centre de Psychiatrie et Neurosciences, Inserm U894, Paris, 75014, France
4 Université Paris Diderot, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Paris, 75013, France
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation 2015, 12:64
doi:10.1186/s12984-015-0054-0
The electronic version of this article is the complete one and can be found online at: http://www.jneuroengrehab.com/content/12/1/64
The electronic version of this article is the complete one and can be found online at: http://www.jneuroengrehab.com/content/12/1/64
Received: | 7 April 2015 |
Accepted: | 13 July 2015 |
Published: | 2 August 2015 |
© 2015 Térémetz et al.
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
Abstract
Background
A high degree of manual dexterity is a central feature of the human upper limb. A
rich interplay of sensory and motor components in the hand and fingers allows for
independent control of fingers in terms of timing, kinematics and force. Stroke often
leads to impaired hand function and decreased manual dexterity, limiting activities
of daily living and impacting quality of life. Clinically, there is a lack of quantitative
multi-dimensional measures of manual dexterity. We therefore developed the Finger
Force Manipulandum (FFM), which allows quantification of key components of manual
dexterity. The purpose of this study was (i) to test the feasibility of using the
FFM to measure key components of manual dexterity in hemiparetic stroke patients,
(ii) to compare differences in dexterity components between stroke patients and controls,
and (iii) to describe individual profiles of dexterity components in stroke patients.
Methods
10 stroke patients with mild-to-moderate hemiparesis and 10 healthy subjects were
recruited. Clinical measures of hand function included the Action Research Arm Test
and the Moberg Pick-Up Test. Four FFM tasks were used: (1) Finger Force Tracking to
measure force control, (2) Sequential Finger Tapping to measure the ability to perform
motor sequences, (3) Single Finger Tapping to measure timing effects, and (4) Multi-Finger
Tapping to measure the ability to selectively move fingers in specified combinations
(independence of finger movements).
Results
Most stroke patients could perform the tracking task, as well as the single and multi-finger
tapping tasks. However, only four patients performed the sequence task. Patients showed
less accurate force control, reduced tapping rate, and reduced independence of finger
movements compared to controls. Unwanted (erroneous) finger taps and overflow to non-tapping
fingers were increased in patients. Dexterity components were not systematically related
among each other, resulting in individually different profiles of deficient dexterity.
Some of the FFM measures correlated with clinical scores.
Conclusions
Quantifying some of the key components of manual dexterity with the FFM is feasible
in moderately affected hemiparetic patients. The FFM can detect group differences
and individual profiles of deficient dexterity. The FFM is a promising tool for the
measurement of key components of manual dexterity after stroke and could allow improved
targeting of motor rehabilitation.
No comments:
Post a Comment