Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
Volume 90, Issue 5 , Pages 793-802 , May 2009

Kinematics of Pointing Movements Made in a Virtual Versus a Physical 3-Dimensional Environment in Healthy and Stroke Subjects

Presented as an abstract to the Society for Neuroscience, October 14–18, 2006, Atlanta, GA; and the World Conference of Physical Therapy, June 2–6, 2007, Vancouver, BC, Canada.

  • Luiz A. Knaut, MSc

      Affiliations

    • School of Rehabilitation, University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada
    • Centre de recherche interdisciplinaire en réadaptation du Montréal métropolitain, Montreal, QC, Canada
    • ,
  • Sandeep K. Subramanian, MSc

      Affiliations

    • Centre de recherche interdisciplinaire en réadaptation du Montréal métropolitain, Montreal, QC, Canada
    • School of Physical and Occupational Therapy, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada
    • ,
  • Bradford J. McFadyen, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Rehabilitation, Laval University, Quebec City, QC, Canada
    • Centre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation and Social Integration, Quebec, QC, Canada
    • ,
  • Daniel Bourbonnais, PhD, OT

      Affiliations

    • School of Rehabilitation, University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada
    • Centre de recherche interdisciplinaire en réadaptation du Montréal métropolitain, Montreal, QC, Canada
    • ,
  • Mindy F. Levin, PhD, PT

      Affiliations

    • Centre de recherche interdisciplinaire en réadaptation du Montréal métropolitain, Montreal, QC, Canada
    • School of Physical and Occupational Therapy, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorrespondence to Mindy F. Levin, PhD, PT, School of Physical and Occupational Therapy, McGill University, 3630 Promenade Sir William Osler, Montreal, QC, Canada, H3G 1Y5

References 

  1. World Health Organization. 2002. http://www.who.int/en/Accessed January 15, 2009
  2. American Heart Association. 2006. http://www.americanheart.orgAccessed January 15, 2009
  3. Olsen TS. Arm and leg paresis as outcome predictors in stroke rehabilitation. Stroke. 1990;21:247–251
  4. Carod-Artal J, Egido JA, Gonzalez JL, Varela de Seijas E. Quality of life among stroke survivors evaluated 1 year after stroke: experience of a stroke unit. Stroke. 2000;31:2995–3000
  5. Cirstea MC, Levin MF. Compensatory strategies for reaching in stroke. Brain. 2000;123:940–953
  6. Cirstea MC, Mitnitski AB, Feldman AG, Levin MF. Interjoint coordination dynamics during reaching in stroke. Exp Brain Res. 2003;151:289–300
  7. Dewald JP, Sheshadri V, Dawson ML, Beer RF. Upper-limb discoordination in hemiparetic stroke: implications for neurorehabilitation. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2001;8:1–12
  8. Levin MF. Interjoint coordination during pointing movements is disrupted in spastic hemiparesis. Brain. 1996;119:281–293
  9. Mercier C, Bourbonnais D. Relative shoulder flexor and handgrip strength is related to upper limb function after stroke. Clin Rehabil. 2004;18:215–221
  10. Musampa NK, Mathieu PA, Levin MF. Relationship between stretch reflex thresholds and voluntary arm muscle activation in patients with spasticity. Exp Brain Res. 2007;181:579–593
  11. Winward CE, Halligan PW, Wade DT. Current practice and clinical relevance of somatosensory assessment after stroke. Clin Rehabil. 1999;13:48–55
  12. Michaelsen SM, Dannenbaum R, Levin MF. Task-specific training with trunk restraint on arm recovery in stroke: randomized control trial. Stroke. 2006;37:186–192
  13. Nudo RJ. Functional and structural plasticity in motor cortex: implications for stroke recovery. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am. 2003;14(1 Suppl):S57–S76
  14. Teasell R, Bayona N, Salter K, Hellings C, Bitensky J. Progress in clinical neurosciences: stroke recovery and rehabilitation. Can J Neurol Sci. 2006;33:357–364
  15. Barker RN, Brauer SG. Upper limb recovery after stroke: the stroke survivors' perspective. Disabil Rehabil. 2005;27:1213–1223
  16. Cirstea MC, Ptito A, Levin MF. Arm reaching improvements with short-term practice depend on the severity of the motor deficit in stroke. Exp Brain Res. 2003;152:476–488
  17. Kleim JA, Jones TA. Principles of experience-dependent neural plasticity: implications for rehabilitation after brain damage. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2008;51:S225–S239
  18. Wolf SL, Winstein CJ, Miller JP, et al. Effect of constraint-induced movement therapy on upper extremity function 3 to 9 months after stroke: the EXCITE randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2006;296:2095–2104
  19. Schultheis MT, Himelstein J, Rizzo AA. Virtual reality and neuropsychology: upgrading the Current Tools. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2002;17:378–394
  20. Tinson DJ. How stroke patients spend their days: an observational study of the treatment regime offered to patients in hospital with movement disorders following stroke. Int Disabil Stud. 1989;11:45–49
  21. Sveistrup H. Motor rehabilitation using virtual reality. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2004;10:1–10
  22. Holden MK. Virtual environments for motor rehabilitation: review. Cyberpsychol Behav. 2005;8:187–219
  23. Foley N, Teasell R, Jutai J, Bhogal S, Kruger E. Evidence-based review of stroke rehabilitation—upper extremity interventions. In:  Teasell R,  Foley N,  Salter K,  Bhogal S,  Jutai J,  Speechley M editor. Evidence-based review of stroke rehabilitation. 10th ed.. 2007;http://www.ebrsr.comAccessed January 15, 2009
  24. Henderson A, Korner-Bitensky N, Levin M. Virtual reality in stroke rehabilitation: a systematic review of its effectiveness for upper limb motor recovery. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2007;14:52–61
  25. Viau A, Feldman AG, McFadyen BJ, Levin MF. Reaching in reality and virtual reality: a comparison of movement kinematics in healthy subjects and in adults with hemiparesis. J Neuroengineering Rehabil. 2004;1:11
  26. Gowland C, Stratford P, Ward M, et al. Measuring physical impairment and disability with the Chedoke-McMaster Stroke Assessment. Stroke. 1993;24:58–63
  27. Fugl-Meyer A, Jaasko L, Leyman I, Olsson S, Steglind S. The post-stroke hemiplegic patient I: a method for evaluation of physical performance. Scand J Rehabil Med. 1975;7:11–17
  28. Duncan P, Goldstein LB, Matchar D, Divine GW, Feussner J. Measurement of motor recovery after stroke: outcome assessment and sample size requirements. Stroke. 1992;23:1084–1089
  29. Nadeau S, Arsenault AB, Gravel D, Lepage Y, Bourbonnais D. Analysis of the spasticity index used in adults with a stroke. Can J Rehabil. 1998;11:219–220
  30. Levin MF, Hui-Chan C. Are H and stretch reflexes in hemiparesis reproducible and correlated with spasticity?. J Neurol. 1993;240:63–71
  31. Subramanian S, Knaut LA, Beaudoin C, McFadyen BJ, Feldman AG, Levin MF. Virtual reality environments for post-stroke arm rehabilitation. J Neuroengineering Rehabil. 2007;4:20
  32. Lo WT, So RH. Cybersickness in the presence of scene rotational movements along different axes. Appl Ergon. 2001;32:1–14
  33. Regan EC, Price KR. The frequency of occurrence and severity of side-effects of immersion virtual reality. Aviat Space Environ Med. 1994;65:527–530
  34. Archambault P, Pigeon P, Feldman AG, Levin MF. Recruitment and sequencing of different degrees of freedom during pointing movements involving the trunk in healthy and hemiparetic subjects. Exp Brain Res. 1999;126:55–67
  35. Satava RM. Medical applications of virtual reality. J Med Syst. 1995;19:275–280
  36. Dumay AC. Medicine in virtual environments. Technol Health Care. 1995;3:75–89
  37. Rose FD, Attree EA, Johnson DA. Virtual reality: an assistive technology in neurological rehabilitation. Curr Opin Neurol. 1996;9:461–467
  38. Wilson PN, Foreman N, Stanton D. Virtual reality, disability and rehabilitation. Disabil Rehabil. 1997;19:213–220
  39. Jang SH, You SH, Hallett M, et al. Cortical reorganization and associated functional motor recovery after virtual reality in patients with chronic stroke: an experimenter-blind preliminary study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;86:2218–2223
  40. You SH, Jang SH, Kim YH, et al. Virtual reality-induced cortical reorganization and associated locomotor recovery in chronic stroke: an experimenter-blind randomized study. Stroke. 2005;36:1166–1171
  41. Latash ML. Virtual reality: a fascinating tool for motor rehabilitation (to be used with caution). Disabil Rehabil. 1998;20:104–105
  42. Stoffregen TA, Bardy BG. On specification and the senses. Behav Brain Sci. 2001;24:195–261
  43. Rochat P, Wraga M. An account of the systematic error in judging what is reachable. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1997;23:199–212
  44. Cumming BG, DeAngelis GC. The physiology of stereopsis. Annu Rev Neurosci. 2001;24:203–238
  45. Servos P. Distance estimation in the visual and visuomotor systems. Exp Brain Res. 2000;130:35–47
  46. Interrante V, Anderson L, Ries B. Distance perception in immersive virtual environments, revisited. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Virtual Reality Conference; 2006 March 25-29; Alexandria, VA.
  47. Perani D, Fazio F, Borghese NA, et al. Different brain correlates for watching real and virtual hand actions. Neuroimage. 2001;14:749–758
  48. Janssen P, Vogels R, Orban GA. Selectivity for 3D shape that reveals distinct areas within macaque inferior temporal cortex. Science. 2000;288:2054–2056
  49. Decety J, Grezes J, Costes N, et al. Brain activity during observation of actions: influence of action content and subject's strategy. Brain. 1997;120:1763–1777
  50. Decety J. Do imagined and executed actions share the same neural substrate?. Brain Res Cogn Brain Res. 1996;3:87–93
  51. Sakata H, Taira M, Kusunoki M, Murata A, Tanaka Y. The TINS Lecture: the parietal association cortex in depth perception and visual control of hand action. Trends Neurosci. 1997;20:350–357
  52. Inoue K, Kawashima R, Satoh K, et al. PET study of pointing with visual feedback of moving hands. J Neurophysiol. 1998;79:117–125
  53. Ketcham CJ, Dounskaia NV, Stelmach GE. The role of vision in the control of continuous multijoint movements. J Mot Behav. 2006;38:29–44
  54. Rossetti Y, Desmurget M, Prablanc C. Vectorial coding of movement: vision, proprioception, or both?. J Neurophysiol. 1995;74:457–463
  55. Saunders JA, Knill DC. Humans use continuous visual feedback from the hand to control both the direction and distance of pointing movements. Exp Brain Res. 2005;162:458–473
  56. Sergio LE, Scott SH. Hand and joint paths during reaching movements with and without vision. Exp Brain Res. 1998;122:157–164
  57. Knapp JM, Loomis JM. Limited field of view of head-mounted displays is not the cause of distance underestimation in virtual environments. Presence. 2004;13:572–577
  58. Loftus A, Murphy S, McKenna I, Mon-Williams M. Reduced fields of view are neither necessary nor sufficient for distance underestimation but reduce precision and may cause calibration problems. Exp Brain Res. 2004;158:328–335
  59. Creem-Regehr SH, Willemsen P, Gooch AA, Thompson WB. The influence of restricted viewing conditions on egocentric distance perception: implications for real and virtual indoor environments. Perception. 2005;34:191–204
  60. Gonzalez-Alvarez C, Subramanian A, Pardhan S. Reaching and grasping with restricted peripheral vision. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2007;27:265–274
  61. Helbig CR, Gabbard C. What determines limb selection for reaching?. Res Q Exerc Sport. 2004;75:47–59
  62. Weiss PL, Rand D, Katz N, Kizony . Video capture virtual reality as a flexible and effective rehabilitation tool. J NeuroEng Rehabil. 2004;1:12

 Supported by the Canadian Foundation for Innovation (project no. 202524).

 We certify that no party having a direct interest in the results of the research supporting this article has or will confer a benefit on us or on any organization with which we are associated, and we certify that all financial and material support for this research (eg, National Institutes of Health or National Health Service grants) and work is clearly identified on the title page of the article.

 Reprints are not available from the author.

PII: S0003-9993(09)00080-X

doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2008.10.030

Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
Volume 90, Issue 5 , Pages 793-802 , May 2009

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution