skip to main content
10.1145/3144826.3145406acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesteemConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Active Multimodal Stimulation in Rehabilitation of paretic upper limb after stroke: technical procedure

Published:18 October 2017Publication History

ABSTRACT

The development of non-invasive transcranial stimulation techniques and their influence in Acquired Brain Injury (ABI) rehabilitation is increasing since nineties. There are several treatments for sensitive and motor upper limb recovery after a neurological injury, whose individual scientific evidence is remarkable. The purpose of this project is to describe the instrument's performance for an active multimodal stimulation in paretic upper limb rehabilitation after stroke.

References

  1. Carolina Colomer, Roberto Llorens, and Enrique Noé. 2016. Mirror therapy in chronic stroke survivors with severely impaired upper limb function: A randomized controlled trial. Eur. J. Phys. Rehabil. Med. 52, 3 (June 2016), 271--8.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Nestor A. Bayona, Jamie Bitensky, Katerine Salter, and Robert Teasell. 2005. The role of task-specific training in rehabilitation therapies. Stroke Rehabil. 12, 3 (February 2005), 58--65.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. D. Corbetta, R. Gatti, L. Moja, and V. Sirtori. 2010. Constraint-induced movement Therapy in stroke patients: systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 46, 4 (December 2010), 537--44.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Alireza Gharabaghi, Florian Grimm, and Gorgios Naros. 2016. Closed-Loop Task Difficulty Adaptation during Virtual Reality Reach-to-Grasp Training Assisted with an Exoskeleton for Stroke Rehabilitation. Front. Neurosci. 10, Article 518 (November 2016), 13 pages.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. A. Benham, F.J.A. Deconinck, M.G. Feltham, A. Ledebt, G.J.P. Savelsbergh, and A.R.P. Smorenburg. 2014.Reflections on Mirror Therapy: A Systematic Review of the Effect of Mirror Visual Feedback on the Brain. Neurorehabil. Neural Repair. 29, 4 (May 2014) 349--361.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. M. Crotty, J.E. Deutsch, S. George, K.E. Laver, and S. Thomas. 2015.Virtual reality for stroke rehabilitation. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 9, 2 (September 2011), 1--107.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. De Kroon, J.R., M.J. Ijzerman, J.R de Kroon, G.J. Lankhorst, and J.H. Van der Lee. 2002. Therapeutic electrical stimulation to improve motor control and functional abilities of the upper extremity after stroke: a systematic review. Clin Rehabil. 16, 4 (June 2002), 350--60.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Jung-Hoon Lee, Min-Jae Lee, Sun-Min Lee, and Hyun-Mo Koo. 2017. Efectiveness of Bilateral Arm Training for Improving Extremity Function and Activities of Daily Living Performance in Hemiplegic Patients. Journal of Stroke and Cerebrovascular Diseases. 26, 5 (May 2017), 1020--1025.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. S.B.I. Badia, M.S. Cameirão, E. Duarte, A. Frisoli, and P.F.M.J. Verschure. 2012. The combined impact of virtual reality neurorehabilitation and its interfaces on upper extremity functional recovery in patients with chronic stroke. Stroke. 43, 10 (Junio 2012), 2720--2728.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. K. Hachisuka, Y. Matsushima, M. Ochi, T. Oda, and S. Saeki. 2013. Effects of anodal and cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation combined with robotic therapy on severely affected arms in chronic stroke patients. J. Rehabil. Med. 45, 2 (September 2012), 137--140.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. M.K. Fleming, D.J. Newham, J.C. Rothwell, L. Sztriha, and J.T. Teo. 2017. The effect of transcranial direct current stimulation on motor sequence learning and upper limb function after stroke. Clinical Neurophisiology. (March 2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. D.J. Edwards, S.J. Page, H.T. Peters, and S. Wortman-Jutt. 2016. Moving Forward by Stimulating the Brain: Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Post-Stroke Hemiparesis. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 10, Article 394(August 2016), 8 pages.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Beth E. Fisher, Shailesh Kantak, Jarugool Tretriluxana, Suradej Tretriluxana, and Allan D. Wu. 2015.Improvement in Paretic Arm Reach-to-Grasp following Low Frequency Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Depends on Object Size: A Pilot Study. Stroke Research and Treatment. 2015, Article ID 498169 (October 2015), 13 pages.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. M.N. McDonell and C.M. Stinear. 2017. TMS measures of motor cortex function after stroke: A meta-analysis. Brain Stimul. 10, 4 (March 2017), 721--734.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Shahanaz Begum, Abdul Khalegue and Jebun Nessa. 2009. Rehabilitation of Stroke Patients -- Effects of Early Intervention of Physical Therapy on Functional Outcome. Bangladesh Journal of Anatomy. 7, 1 (January 2009), 62--67.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. David J. Clarke, and Anne Forster. 2015. Improving post-stroke recovery: the role of the multidisciplinary health care team. J Multidiscip Healthc 8, (September 2015), 433--442.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. IreneGuerrero Claro, and María I. López Leiva. 2015. Application of Bobath Concept in patients who have suffered a stroke. TOG. 12, 22 (November 2015), 18 pages.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. S.K. Shah. 2010. Reliability of the Original Brunnstrom Recovery Scale Following Hemiplegia. Aust Occup Ther J. 31, 4 (December 1984), 144--151.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Wyatt O. Briggs, Kayla B. Hindle, Junggi Hong, and Tyler J. Whitcomb. 2012. Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation (PNF); Its Mechanisms and Effects of Range of Motion and Muscular Function. Journal of Human Kinetics. 31 (March 2012), 105--113.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Sourya Acharya, and Samarth Shukla. 2012. Mirror neurons: Enigma of metaphysical modular brain. J Nat Sci Biol Med. 3, 2 (December 2012), 118--124.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Hwi-Youg Cho, Jinhwa Jung, Kitae Kim, and Byounghee Lee. 2015. The effect of neurofeedback on brain wave and visual perception in stroke: a randomized control trial. J Phys Ther Sci. 27, 3 (March 2015), 673--676.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. G. Rauter, R. Riener, R. Sigrist, and P. Wolf. 2013. Augmented visual, auditory, haptic, and multimodal feedback in motor learning: A review. Psychon. Bull. Rev.20, 1 (November 2012), 21--53.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. L. Cohen, R. Duque, R. Mazzocchio, and N. Murase. 2004. Influence of interhemispheric interactions on motor function in chronic stroke. Ann. Neurol. 55, 3 (March 2004), 400--409.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. P. Celnik, L.G. Cohen, M. Dimyan, N.J. Paik, and Y. Vandermeeren. 2009. Effects of combined peripheral nerve stimulation and brain polarization on performance of a motor sequence task after chronic stroke. Stroke. 40, 5 (May 2009), 1764--71.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. M.H. Chun, and S.J.Lee. 2014. Combination transcranial direct current stimulation and virtual reality therapy for upper extremity training in patients with subacute stroke. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. 95, 3 (March 2014), 431--438.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Active Multimodal Stimulation in Rehabilitation of paretic upper limb after stroke: technical procedure

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Other conferences
        TEEM 2017: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality
        October 2017
        723 pages
        ISBN:9781450353861
        DOI:10.1145/3144826

        Copyright © 2017 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 18 October 2017

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article
        • Research
        • Refereed limited

        Acceptance Rates

        TEEM 2017 Paper Acceptance Rate84of109submissions,77%Overall Acceptance Rate496of705submissions,70%
      • Article Metrics

        • Downloads (Last 12 months)5
        • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1

        Other Metrics

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader