Somatosensory system integrity explains differences in treatment response after stroke
OBJECTIVETo test the hypothesis that, in the context of robotic therapy designed to enhance proprioceptive feedback via a Hebbian model, integrity of both somatosensory and motor systems would be important in understanding interparticipant differences in treatment-related motor gains. METHODSIn 30 p...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Neurology 2019-03, Vol.92 (10), p.e1098-e1108 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | OBJECTIVETo test the hypothesis that, in the context of robotic therapy designed to enhance proprioceptive feedback via a Hebbian model, integrity of both somatosensory and motor systems would be important in understanding interparticipant differences in treatment-related motor gains.
METHODSIn 30 patients with chronic stroke, behavioral performance, neural injury, and neural function were quantified for somatosensory and motor systems. Patients then received a 3-week robot-based therapy targeting finger movements with enhanced proprioceptive feedback.
RESULTSHand function improved after treatment (Box and Blocks score increase of 2.8 blocks, p = 0.001) but with substantial variability9 patients showed improvement exceeding the minimal clinically important difference (6 blocks), while 8 patients (all of whom had >2-SD greater proprioception deficit compared to 25 healthy controls) showed no improvement. In terms of baseline behavioral assessments, a somatosensory measure (finger proprioception assessed robotically) best predicted treatment gains, outperforming all measures of motor behavior. When the neural basis underlying variability in treatment response was examined, somatosensory-related variables were again the strongest predictors. A multivariate model combining total sensory system injury and sensorimotor cortical connectivity (between ipsilesional primary motor and secondary somatosensory cortices) explained 56% of variance in treatment-induced hand functional gains (p = 0.002).
CONCLUSIONSMeasures related to the somatosensory network best explained interparticipant differences in treatment-related hand function gains. These results underscore the importance of baseline somatosensory integrity for improving hand function after stroke and provide insights useful for individualizing rehabilitation therapy.
CLINICALTRIALS.GOV IDENTIFIER:NCT02048826. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0028-3878 1526-632X |
DOI: | 10.1212/WNL.0000000000007041 |