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...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Neurology 2019-03, Vol.92 (10), p.e1098-e1108
Hauptverfasser: Ingemanson, Morgan L, Rowe, Justin R, Chan, Vicky, Wolbrecht, Eric T, Reinkensmeyer, David J, Cramer, Steven C
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page e1108
container_issue 10
container_start_page e1098
container_title Neurology
container_volume 92
creator Ingemanson, Morgan L
Rowe, Justin R
Chan, Vicky
Wolbrecht, Eric T
Reinkensmeyer, David J
Cramer, Steven C
description 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.
doi_str_mv 10.1212/WNL.0000000000007041
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_6442007</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2188206928</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5081-392f4184e659cdd1d8bb984f91a1007c83aae705816393dcca8611f6e2cac1d33</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9UU1P4zAQtVagpVv4B6tVjlzCeuw0cS5ICPGxUgUHPm-W60zaQBIXj0vpv8erFgQcmMsc3ps3b-Yx9hv4AQgQf-8uxgf8QxU8gx9sACORp7kU91tswLlQqVSF2mG_iB44j2BR_mQ7khdCSeADdnvlOhMcYU_OrxJaUcAuafqAU9-EVYIv89Y0PSVVU9fosbdIEU6CRxM67EPikeauJ0xMHdAnFLx7xF22XZuWcG_Th-zm9OT6-DwdX579Oz4ap3bEFaSyFHUGKsN8VNqqgkpNJqXK6hIMxIusksZgwUcKclnKylqjcoA6R2GNhUrKITtc684Xkw4rGw150-q5bzrjV9qZRn9G-mamp-5Z51km4oYosL8R8O5pgRR015DFtjU9ugVpAUoJnpfxXUOWranWOyKP9fsa4Pp_JDpGor9GEsf-fLT4PvSWQSSoNWHp2vhBemwXS_R6hqYNs--1XwFPSpsh</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2188206928</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Somatosensory system integrity explains differences in treatment response after stroke</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Journals@Ovid Complete</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Ingemanson, Morgan L ; Rowe, Justin R ; Chan, Vicky ; Wolbrecht, Eric T ; Reinkensmeyer, David J ; Cramer, Steven C</creator><creatorcontrib>Ingemanson, Morgan L ; Rowe, Justin R ; Chan, Vicky ; Wolbrecht, Eric T ; Reinkensmeyer, David J ; Cramer, Steven C</creatorcontrib><description>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 &gt;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.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0028-3878</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1526-632X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000007041</identifier><identifier>PMID: 30728310</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: American Academy of Neurology</publisher><subject>Adult ; Aged ; Cerebral Cortex - diagnostic imaging ; Cerebral Cortex - physiopathology ; Electroencephalography ; Feedback ; Female ; Fingers - physiopathology ; Humans ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Proprioception - physiology ; Pyramidal Tracts - diagnostic imaging ; Pyramidal Tracts - physiopathology ; Recovery of Function - physiology ; Robotics ; Stroke - diagnostic imaging ; Stroke - physiopathology ; Stroke - therapy ; Treatment Outcome ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>Neurology, 2019-03, Vol.92 (10), p.e1098-e1108</ispartof><rights>2019 American Academy of Neurology</rights><rights>2019 American Academy of Neurology.</rights><rights>2019 American Academy of Neurology 2019 American Academy of Neurology</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5081-392f4184e659cdd1d8bb984f91a1007c83aae705816393dcca8611f6e2cac1d33</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5081-392f4184e659cdd1d8bb984f91a1007c83aae705816393dcca8611f6e2cac1d33</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,314,777,781,882,27905,27906</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30728310$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Ingemanson, Morgan L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rowe, Justin R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chan, Vicky</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wolbrecht, Eric T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reinkensmeyer, David J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cramer, Steven C</creatorcontrib><title>Somatosensory system integrity explains differences in treatment response after stroke</title><title>Neurology</title><addtitle>Neurology</addtitle><description>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 &gt;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.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Cerebral Cortex - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Cerebral Cortex - physiopathology</subject><subject>Electroencephalography</subject><subject>Feedback</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Fingers - physiopathology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Magnetic Resonance Imaging</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Proprioception - physiology</subject><subject>Pyramidal Tracts - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Pyramidal Tracts - physiopathology</subject><subject>Recovery of Function - physiology</subject><subject>Robotics</subject><subject>Stroke - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Stroke - physiopathology</subject><subject>Stroke - therapy</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>0028-3878</issn><issn>1526-632X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9UU1P4zAQtVagpVv4B6tVjlzCeuw0cS5ICPGxUgUHPm-W60zaQBIXj0vpv8erFgQcmMsc3ps3b-Yx9hv4AQgQf-8uxgf8QxU8gx9sACORp7kU91tswLlQqVSF2mG_iB44j2BR_mQ7khdCSeADdnvlOhMcYU_OrxJaUcAuafqAU9-EVYIv89Y0PSVVU9fosbdIEU6CRxM67EPikeauJ0xMHdAnFLx7xF22XZuWcG_Th-zm9OT6-DwdX579Oz4ap3bEFaSyFHUGKsN8VNqqgkpNJqXK6hIMxIusksZgwUcKclnKylqjcoA6R2GNhUrKITtc684Xkw4rGw150-q5bzrjV9qZRn9G-mamp-5Z51km4oYosL8R8O5pgRR015DFtjU9ugVpAUoJnpfxXUOWranWOyKP9fsa4Pp_JDpGor9GEsf-fLT4PvSWQSSoNWHp2vhBemwXS_R6hqYNs--1XwFPSpsh</recordid><startdate>20190305</startdate><enddate>20190305</enddate><creator>Ingemanson, Morgan L</creator><creator>Rowe, Justin R</creator><creator>Chan, Vicky</creator><creator>Wolbrecht, Eric T</creator><creator>Reinkensmeyer, David J</creator><creator>Cramer, Steven C</creator><general>American Academy of Neurology</general><general>Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20190305</creationdate><title>Somatosensory system integrity explains differences in treatment response after stroke</title><author>Ingemanson, Morgan L ; Rowe, Justin R ; Chan, Vicky ; Wolbrecht, Eric T ; Reinkensmeyer, David J ; Cramer, Steven C</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c5081-392f4184e659cdd1d8bb984f91a1007c83aae705816393dcca8611f6e2cac1d33</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Cerebral Cortex - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Cerebral Cortex - physiopathology</topic><topic>Electroencephalography</topic><topic>Feedback</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Fingers - physiopathology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Magnetic Resonance Imaging</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Proprioception - physiology</topic><topic>Pyramidal Tracts - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Pyramidal Tracts - physiopathology</topic><topic>Recovery of Function - physiology</topic><topic>Robotics</topic><topic>Stroke - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Stroke - physiopathology</topic><topic>Stroke - therapy</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Ingemanson, Morgan L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rowe, Justin R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chan, Vicky</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wolbrecht, Eric T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reinkensmeyer, David J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cramer, Steven C</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Neurology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Ingemanson, Morgan L</au><au>Rowe, Justin R</au><au>Chan, Vicky</au><au>Wolbrecht, Eric T</au><au>Reinkensmeyer, David J</au><au>Cramer, Steven C</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Somatosensory system integrity explains differences in treatment response after stroke</atitle><jtitle>Neurology</jtitle><addtitle>Neurology</addtitle><date>2019-03-05</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>92</volume><issue>10</issue><spage>e1098</spage><epage>e1108</epage><pages>e1098-e1108</pages><issn>0028-3878</issn><eissn>1526-632X</eissn><abstract>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 &gt;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.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>American Academy of Neurology</pub><pmid>30728310</pmid><doi>10.1212/WNL.0000000000007041</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0028-3878
ispartof Neurology, 2019-03, Vol.92 (10), p.e1098-e1108
issn 0028-3878
1526-632X
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_6442007
source MEDLINE; Journals@Ovid Complete; Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects Adult
Aged
Cerebral Cortex - diagnostic imaging
Cerebral Cortex - physiopathology
Electroencephalography
Feedback
Female
Fingers - physiopathology
Humans
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Male
Middle Aged
Proprioception - physiology
Pyramidal Tracts - diagnostic imaging
Pyramidal Tracts - physiopathology
Recovery of Function - physiology
Robotics
Stroke - diagnostic imaging
Stroke - physiopathology
Stroke - therapy
Treatment Outcome
Young Adult
title Somatosensory system integrity explains differences in treatment response after stroke
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-21T05%3A06%3A20IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Somatosensory%20system%20integrity%20explains%20differences%20in%20treatment%20response%20after%20stroke&rft.jtitle=Neurology&rft.au=Ingemanson,%20Morgan%20L&rft.date=2019-03-05&rft.volume=92&rft.issue=10&rft.spage=e1098&rft.epage=e1108&rft.pages=e1098-e1108&rft.issn=0028-3878&rft.eissn=1526-632X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1212/WNL.0000000000007041&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2188206928%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2188206928&rft_id=info:pmid/30728310&rfr_iscdi=true