Well shit, let's write up two hand protocols with different efficacy ratings, one for VR, one for repetitive task practice.
Neural Patterns of Reorganization after Intensive Robot-Assisted Virtual Reality Therapy and Repetitive Task Practice in Patients with Chronic Stroke
- 1Human Performance and Engineering Research, Kessler Foundation, West Orange, NJ, United States
- 2Department of Rehabilitation and Movement Science, Rutgers University, Newark, NJ, United States
- 3Department of Biomedical Engineering, NJIT, Newark, NJ, United States
- 4Department of Physical Therapy, Movement, and Rehabilitation Science, Northeastern University, Boston, MA, United States
- 5Department of Bioengineering, Northeastern University, Boston, MA, United States
- 6Department of Biology, Northeastern University, Boston, MA, United States
Introduction
Recovery of hand function is challenging after stroke.
Empirical data suggest that treatment can be beneficial if it includes
many repetitions of challenging and meaningful tasks (1–3).
Several approaches to delivering high volume, intense, and salient
rehabilitation activities have emerged over the last two decades. These
treatments, which include repetitive task practice (RTP), robotically
assisted rehabilitation, and virtual rehabilitation activities, produce
improvements in hand function that exceed the standard of care in the US
(4, 5).
Although a strong case has been made that virtual
reality (VR) and robotics can be useful technologies for delivering
challenging, meaningful, and mass practice, outcome studies
investigating the true benefits of VR/robotics as compared to
dose-matched RTP remain mixed (6, 7).
For example, we have shown significant group-level improvement in hand
and arm function of chronic stroke survivors in response to RTP and
robot-assisted VR (RAVR) training to be similar for both groups (8), a finding that agrees with group-level effects in other clinical studies (9, 10).
However, whether the underlying neural patterns of reorganization that
are induced by the different training regimes are also similar remains
unknown. This becomes important to understand because it may inform
researchers and clinicians whether RAVR versus RTP may preferentially
facilitate distinct neural patterns of reorganization. If so, then
perhaps the therapy choice can be tailored more appropriately to
individuals to elicit optimal benefits.
The goal of this study was to compare the effect of
RAVR- and RTP-based interventions on neural pattern reorganization.
Because neural reorganization likely reflects complex processes that
include the formation of new connections and/or re-weighting of existing
connections, the patterns that emerge are unlikely to be reliably
captured using one proxy of activation. For example, while numerous
studies have shown training-induced changes in the extent of brain
activity, the results of those studies conflict in terms of whether the
changes reflect an increase or a decrease in brain activity (11–15).
Second, there seems to be a relationship between the pattern of
reorganization (increase or decrease in ipsilesional somatosensory
activation) and intactness of the hand knob area of M1 and its
descending motor fibers (16), and a dependence on whether the lesion is cortical or subcortical (17). Connectivity measures may be a complementary way to understand neural reorganization patterns underlying stroke recovery (18)
by providing additional information about dynamic network-level changes
above and beyond what can be inferred from extent and laterality of
activation (19, 20).
In this study, we therefore characterize the pattern of
neural reorganization using multiple measures that included the
magnitude of change in brain activation, the extent of activation, the
re-lateralization of brain activation in a set of homologous
interhemispheric regions of interest, and interactions between multiple
regions of interest based on measures of functional and effective
connectivity. To our knowledge, this is the first study to characterize
brain reorganization at the ROI and network interaction level with
multiple functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) measures before
and after RAVR and RTP training. In order to delineate the relevance of
brain reorganization after training, we also correlated the brain
activation outcomes with clinical outcome measures.
We hypothesized that both treatments might have similar
effects on the magnitude and laterality of activation in a given region
of interest. However, because RAVR training provides a training
environment that is enriched and augmented with visual and haptic
feedback, we expected that the functional and effective connectivity
between motor/premotor cortices and visuomotor areas like the superior
parietal lobule may show stronger effects in the RAVR group, as compared
to the RTP-based training group (21–25).
We propose that identifying the neurophysiologic correlates of
behavioral motor function improvement might allow strategic refinement
of existing training approaches and the development of individually
tailored interventions.
More at link.
More at link.
No comments:
Post a Comment