Volume 87, Issue 11 , Pages 1463-1470, November 2006
Kinematic Analysis of Upper Limbs and Trunk Movement During Bilateral Movement After Stroke
Abstract
Messier S, Bourbonnais D, Desrosiers J, Roy Y. Kinematic analysis of upper limbs and trunk movement during bilateral movement after stroke.
Objective
To compare the kinematics of the upper limbs and trunk during unilateral and parallel bilateral tasks in subjects with hemiparesis and control subjects.
Design
Comparative study.
Setting
Geriatric center offering rehabilitation services.
Participants
Convenience sample of 15 persons (age, 69.4±12.0y; ≥3mo poststroke) recruited in a geriatric center with rehabilitation services, and 13 control persons (67.8±7.5y) participated in the study.
Interventions
Not applicable.
Main Outcome Measures
Unilateral and bilateral movements toward 1 or 2 targets located beyond arm’s length and positioned in 3 directions. Angular changes of both upper limbs and trunk were characterized in the sagittal, frontal, and horizontal planes.
Results
During the bilateral task, the deficits of the kinematic joints of the paretic upper limb persisted in subjects with hemiparesis as compared with the corresponding upper limb in the control subjects (abduction shoulder: subjects with hemiparesis, 5.7°±5.3°; control subjects, 0.7°±4.8°; extension elbow: subjects with hemiparesis, 38.2°±14.2°; control subjects, 52.8°±12.5°) with a marked flexion of the trunk (subjects with hemiparesis, 33.7°±8.7°; control subjects, 26.8°±5.8°). The elbow extension of the nonparetic upper limb was reduced (subjects with hemiparesis, 41.0°±13.6°; control subjects, 52.8°±12.5°).
Conclusions
The use of parallel bilateral reaching tasks and placing movements of the upper extremities in the subjects with hemiparesis contributed an increase in the trunk flexion rather than improve the motor performance of the paretic upper limb, especially with regard to increasing elbow extension.
Key Words: Movement, Paresis, Range of motion, articular, Rehabilitation, Stroke, Upper limbs
Supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (grant no. 9810DRN-1241-58411), the Réseau provincial de recherche en adaptation-réadaptation (REPAR) (grant no. 1895), and the Fonds de la recherche en santé du Québec-REPAR (grant no. 22113-2078).No commercial party having a direct financial interest in the results of the research supporting this article has or will confer a benefit upon the author(s) or upon any organization with which the author(s) is/are associated.
PII: S0003-9993(06)01267-6
doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2006.07.273
© 2006 the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine and the American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Volume 87, Issue 11 , Pages 1463-1470, November 2006
