SAGE Journals Online
Advertisement
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Advertisement

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kwakkel, G.
Right arrow Articles by Krebs, H. I.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kwakkel, G.
Right arrow Articles by Krebs, H. I.
Right arrowPubmed/NCBI databases
Medline Plus Health Information
*Arm Injuries and Disorders
*Stroke
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Reviews

Effects of Robot-Assisted Therapy on Upper Limb Recovery After Stroke: A Systematic Review

Gert Kwakkel, PhD

Department Rehabilitation Medicine and Research Institute MOVE, VU University Medical Center Amsterdam, The Netherlands, Department Rehabilitation Medicine, Rudolf Magnus Institute of NeuroScience, University Medical Center Utrecht, The Netherlands, g.kwakkel{at}vumc.nl

Boudewijn J. Kollen, PhD

Research Bureau, Isala Klinieken Zwolle, The Netherlands

Hermano I. Krebs, PhD

Mechanical Engineering Department, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, Department of Neurology and Neuroscience, Burke Institute of Medical Research, Weill Medical College, Cornell University, White Plains, New York, Department of Neurology, University of Maryland, School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland

Objective. The aim of the study was to present a systematic review of studies that investigate the effects of robot-assisted therapy on motor and functional recovery in patients with stroke. Methods. A database of articles published up to October 2006 was compiled using the following Medline key words: cerebral vascular accident, cerebral vascular disorders, stroke, paresis, hemiplegia, upper extremity, arm, and robot. References listed in relevant publications were also screened. Studies that satisfied the following selection criteria were included: (1) patients were diagnosed with cerebral vascular accident; (2) effects of robot-assisted therapy for the upper limb were investigated; (3) the outcome was measured in terms of motor and/or functional recovery of the upper paretic limb; and (4) the study was a randomized clinical trial (RCT). For each outcome measure, the estimated effect size (ES) and the summary effect size (SES) expressed in standard deviation units (SDU) were calculated for motor recovery and functional ability (activities of daily living [ADLs]) using fixed and random effect models. Ten studies, involving 218 patients, were included in the synthesis. Their methodological quality ranged from 4 to 8 on a (maximum) 10-point scale. Results. Meta-analysis showed a nonsignificant heterogeneous SES in terms of upper limb motor recovery. Sensitivity analysis of studies involving only shoulder-elbow robotics subsequently demonstrated a significant homogeneous SES for motor recovery of the upper paretic limb. No significant SES was observed for functional ability (ADL). Conclusion. As a result of marked heterogeneity in studies between distal and proximal arm robotics, no overall significant effect in favor of robot-assisted therapy was found in the present meta-analysis. However, subsequent sensitivity analysis showed a significant improvement in upper limb motor function after stroke for upper arm robotics. No significant improvement was found in ADL function. However, the administered ADL scales in the reviewed studies fail to adequately reflect recovery of the paretic upper limb, whereas valid instruments that measure outcome of dexterity of the paretic arm and hand are mostly absent in selected studies. Future research into the effects of robot-assisted therapy should therefore distinguish between upper and lower robotics arm training and concentrate on kinematical analysis to differentiate between genuine upper limb motor recovery and functional recovery due to compensation strategies by proximal control of the trunk and upper limb.

Key Words: Robotics • Cerebrovascular accident • Activities of daily living • Upper limb • Review • Systematic.

References

  • Muntner P., Garrett E., Klag MJ, Coresh J. Trends in stroke prevalence between 1973 and 1991 in the US population 25 to 74 years of age. Stroke. 2002;33:1209-1213.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Kwakkel G., Kollen BJ, van der Grond J., Prevo AJ Probability of regaining dexterity in the flaccid upper limb: impact of severity of paresis and time since onset in acute stroke. Stroke. 2003;34: 2181-2186.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Van Peppen RP, Kwakkel G., Wood-Dauphinee S., Hendriks HJ, Van der Wees PJ, Dekker J. The impact of physical therapy on functional outcomes after stroke: what's the evidence? Clin Rehabil. 2004;18:833-862.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Kwakkel G., Kollen BJ, Lindeman E. Understanding the pattern of functional recovery after stroke: facts and theories. Restor Neurol Neurosci. 2004;22:281-299.[Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Krebs HI, Hogan N., Aisen ML, Volpe BT Robot-aided neurorehabilitation. IEEE Trans Rehabil Eng. 1998;6:75-87.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Krebs HI, Volpe BT, Aisen ML, Hogan N. Increasing productivity and quality of care: robotic-aided neurorehabilitation. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2000;37:639-652.[Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Reinkensmeyer DJ, Kahn LE, Averbuch M., McKenna-Cole AN, Schmit BD, Rymer WZ Understanding and treating arm movement impairment after chronic brain injury: progress with the ARM Guide. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2000;37:653-662.[Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Burgar CG, Lum PS, Shor PC, Van der Loos HFM. Development of robots for rehabilitation therapy: the Palo Alto VA/Stanford experience. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2000;37:663-673.[Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Lum PS, Burgar CG, Shor PC Evidence for improved muscle activation patterns after retraining of reaching movements with the MIME robotic system in subjects with post-stroke hemiparesis. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2004;12:186-194.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Daly JJ, Hogan N., Perepezko EM, et al. Response to upper-limb robotics and functional neuromuscular stimulation following stroke. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2005;42(6):723-736.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Basmajian JV, Gowland CA, Finlayson AJ, Hall AL, Swanson LR, Stratford PW Stroke treatment: comparison of integrated behavioural physical therapy vs. traditional physical therapy programs. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1987;68:276-272.
  • Lum PS, Burgar CG, Shor PC, Majmundar M., Van der Loos M. Robot-assisted movement training compared with conventional therapy techniques for the rehabilitation of upper-limb motor function after stroke. Arch. Phys Med Rehabil. 2002;83(7):952-959.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Logigian MK, Samuels MA, Falconer J., Zagar R. Clinical exercise trial for stroke subjects. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1983;64:364-367.[Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Wagenaar RC, Meijer OG, van Wieringen P., Kuik DJ, Hazenberg GL, Lindeboom J. The functional recovery of stroke: a comparison between neuro-developmental treatment and the Brunnstrom method. Scand J Rehabil Med. 1990;22:1-8.[Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Wolf SL, LeCraw DE, Barton LA Comparison of motor copy and targeted biofeedback training techniques for restitution of upper extremity function among subjects with neurologic disorders. Phys Ther. 1989;69(9):719-735.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Butefisch C., Humelsheim H., Denzler P., Mauritz KH Repetitive training of isolated movements improves the outcome of motor rehabilitation of the centrally paretic hand. J Neurol Sci. 1995;130:56-68.
  • Foley NC, Bhogal SK, Teasell RW, Bureau Y., Speechley MR Estimates of quality and reliability with the physiotherapy evidence-based database scale to assess the methodology of randomized controlled trials of pharmacological and nonpharmacological interventions. Phys Ther. 2006;86(6):817-824.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Dobkin BH Strategies for stroke rehabilitation. Lancet Neurol. 2004;3:528-526.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Hesse S., Schmidt H., Werner C., Bardeleben A. Upper and lower extremity robotic devices for rehabilitation and for studying motor control. Curr Opin Neurol. 2003;16:705-710.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Hidler J., Nichols D., Pelliccio M., Brady K. Advances in the understanding and treatment of stroke impairment using robotic devices. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2005;12:22-33.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Hogan N., Krebs HI Interactive robots for neuro-rehabilitation. Restor Neurol Neuorsci. 2004;22:349-358.
  • Lum P., Reinkensmeyer D., Mahoney R., Rymer WZ, Burgar C. Robot devices for movement therapy after stroke: current status and challenge to clinical acceptance. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2002;8:40-53.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Platz T. Evidence-based arm rehabilitation. Nervenarzt. 2003;74: 841-849.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Riener R., Nef T., Colombo G. Robot-aided neurorehabilitation of the upper extremities. Med. Biol. Eng. Comput. 2005;43:2-10.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Volpe BT, Krebs HI, Hogan N. Is robot-aided sensorimotor training in stroke rehabilitation a realistic option? Curr Opin. Neurol. 2001;14:745-752.
  • Brewer BR, Fagan M., Klatzky RL, Matsuoka Y. Perceptual limits for a robotic rehabilitation environment using visual feedback distortion. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2005;13(1):1-11.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Colombo R., Pisano M., Micere S., et al. Robotic techniques for upper limb evaluation and rehabilitation of stroke patients. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2005;13(3):311-324.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Cozens JA Robotic assistance of an active upper limb exercise in neurologically impaired patiens.IEEETrans Rehabil Eng. 1999;7:254-256.[CrossRef]
  • Dipietro L., Ferraro M., Palazzolo JJ, Krebs HI, Volpe BT, Hogan N. Customized interactive robotic treatment for stroke: EMG-triggered therapy. IEEE Trans Neura1 Syst Rehabil Eng. 2005;13:325-334.[CrossRef]
  • Fasoli SE, Krebs HI, Stein J., Frontera WR, Hogan N. Effects of robotic therapy on motor impairment and recovery in chronic stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2003;84:477-482.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Fasoli SE, Krebs HI, Stein J., Frontera WR, Hughes R., Hogan N. Robotic therapy for chronic motor impairments after stroke: follow-up results. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004;85:1106-1111.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Ferraro M., Palazzolo JJ, Krol J., Krebs HI, Hogan N., Volpe BT Robot-aided sensorimotor arm training improves outcome in patients with chronic stroke. Neurology. 2003;61:1604-1607.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Finley MA, Fasoli SE, Dipietro L., et al. Short-duration robotic therapy in stroke patients with severe upper-limb motor impairment. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2005;42:683-692.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Johnson MJ, Van der Loos HF, Burgar CG, Shor P., Leifer LJ Experimental results using force-feedback cueing in robot-assisted stroke therapy. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2005;13:335-348.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Krebs HI, Ferraro M., Buerger SP, et al. Rehabilitation robotics: pilot trial of a spatial extension for MIT-Manus. Journal of Neuroengineering Rehabilitation. 2004;1:5.[CrossRef]
  • Krebs HI, Aisen ML, Volpe BT, Hogan N. Quantization of continuous arm movements in humans with brain injury. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1999;99:4645-4649.
  • Krebs HI, Palazzolo JJ, Dipietro L., et al. Rehabilitation robotic: performance-based progressive robot-assisted therapy. Auton Robot. 2003;15:7-20.[CrossRef]
  • MacClellan LR, Bradham DD, Whitall J., et al. Robotic upper-limb neurorehabilitation in chronic stroke patients. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2005;42:717-722.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Matsuoka Y., Allin SJ, Klatzky RL The tolerance for visual feedback distortions in a virtal environment. Physiol Behav. 2002;77:651-655.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Micera S., Carozza MC, Guglielmelli E., et al. A simple robotic system for neurorehabilitation. Auton Robot. 2005;19:271-284.[CrossRef]
  • Patton JL, Stoykov M., Kovic M. Evaluation of robotic training forces that either enhance or reduce error in chronic hemiparetic stroke survivors. Exp Brain Res. 2005;168:368-383.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Reikensmeyer DJ, Schmit BD, Rymer WZ Assessment of active and passive restraint during guided reaching after chronic brain injury. Ann Biomed Eng. 1999;27:805-814.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Reinkensmeyer DJ, Pang CT, Nessler JA, Painter CC Web-based telerehabilitation for the upper extremity after stroke. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2002;10:102-108.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Rohrer B., Fasoli S., Krebs HI, et al. Movement smoothness changes during stroke recovery. J Neurosci. 2002;22:8297-8304.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Stein J., Krebs HI, Frontera WR, Fasoli SE, Hughes R., Hogan N. Comparison of two techniques of robot-aided upper limb exercise training after stroke. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2004;85:1106-1111.[CrossRef]
  • Takahashi CD, Reinkensmeyer DJ Hemiparetic stroke impairs anticipatory control of arm movement. Exp Brain Res. 2003;149: 131-140.[Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Volpe BT, Krebs HI, Hogan N., Edelsteinn L., Diels CM, Aisen ML Robot training enhanced motor outcome in patients with stroke maintained over 3 years. Neurology. 1999;53:1874-1876.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Aisen ML, Krebs HI, Hogan N., McDowel F., Volpe BT The effect of robot-assisted therapy and rehabilitative training on motor recovery following stroke. Arch Neurol. 1997;54:443-446.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Fasoli SE, Krebs HI, Ferraro M., Hogan N., Volpe BT Does shorter rehabilitation limit potential recovery poststroke? Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2004;18:88-94.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Hesse S., Werner C., Pohl M., Rueckriem S., Mehrhoz J., Lingnau ML Computerized arm training improves the motor control of the severely affected arm after stoke. Stroke. 2005;36:1960-1966.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Kahn LE, Averbuch M., Rymer WZ, Reinkensmeyer J. Comparison of robot-assisted reaching to free reaching in promoting recovery from chronic stroke. In: Mokhtari M, ed. Integration of Assistive Technology in the Information Age. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: IOS Press; 2001:39-44.
  • Kahn LE, Zygman ML, Rymer WZ, Reinkensmeyer D.J. Robot-assisted reaching exercise promotes arm movement recovery in chronic hemiparetic stroke: a randomized controlled pilot study. Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation. 2006;3;1-13.[CrossRef]
  • Lum PS, Burgar CG, Van der Loos M., Shor PC, Majmumdar M., Yap R. MIME robotic device for upper-limb neurorehabilitation in subacute stroke subjects: a follow-up study. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2006;43:631-642.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Volpe BT, Krebs HI, Hogan N., Edelstein L., Diels C., Aisen ML A novel approach to stroke rehabilitation: robot-aided sensorimotor stimulation. Neurology. 2000;54:1938-1944.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Sanford J., Moreland J., Swanson LR, Stratford PW, Gowland C. Reliability of Fugl-Meyer assessment for testing motor performance in patients following stroke. Phys Ther. 1993;73:447-454.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Rohrer B., Fasoli S., Krebs HI, et al. Movement smoothness changes during stroke recovery. J Neurosci. 2002;22:18:8297-8304.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Cirstea MC, Levin MF Compensatory strategies for reaching in stroke. Brain. 2000;123:940-953.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Kwakkel G., Kollen B., Twisk J. Impact of time on improvement of outcome after stroke. Stroke. 2006;37:2348-2353.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • van der Lee JH, Beckerman H., Lankhorst GJ, Bouter LM The responsiveness of the Action Research Arm test and the Fugl-Meyer Assessment scale in chronic stroke patients. J Rehab Med. 2001;33:110—113.[CrossRef]
  • Wolf SL, Winstein CJ, Miller JP, et al; EXCITE Investigators. 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.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Gowland C., Stratford P., Ward M., et al. Measuring physical impairment and disability with the Chedoke-McMaster Stroke Assessment. Stroke. 1993;24:58-63.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Pollock AS, Legg L., Langhorne P., Sellars C. Barriers to achieving evidence-based stroke rehabilitation. Clin Rehabil. 2000;14:611-617.
  • Kwakkel G. Impact of intensity of practice after stroke: issues for consideration. Disabil Rehabil. 2006;28:823-830.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]

This version was published on April 1, 2008

Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair, Vol. 22, No. 2, 111-121 (2008)
DOI: 10.1177/1545968307305457
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Neurorehabil Neural RepairHome page
M. D. Ellis, T. Sukal-Moulton, and J. P. A. Dewald
Progressive Shoulder Abduction Loading is a Crucial Element of Arm Rehabilitation in Chronic Stroke
Neurorehabil Neural Repair, October 1, 2009; 23(8): 862 - 869.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Neurorehabil Neural RepairHome page
A. C. Lo, P. Guarino, H. I. Krebs, B. T. Volpe, C. T. Bever, P. W. Duncan, R. J. Ringer, T. H. Wagner, L. G. Richards, D. M. Bravata, et al.
Multicenter Randomized Trial of Robot-Assisted Rehabilitation for Chronic Stroke: Methods and Entry Characteristics for VA ROBOTICS
Neurorehabil Neural Repair, October 1, 2009; 23(8): 775 - 783.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Neurorehabil Neural RepairHome page
T. Platz, S. van Kaick, J. Mehrholz, O. Leidner, C. Eickhof, and M. Pohl
Best Conventional Therapy Versus Modular Impairment-Oriented Training for Arm Paresis After Stroke: A Single-Blind, Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial
Neurorehabil Neural Repair, September 1, 2009; 23(7): 706 - 716.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Arch NeurolHome page
B. T. Volpe, P. T. Huerta, J. L. Zipse, A. Rykman, D. Edwards, L. Dipietro, N. Hogan, and H. I. Krebs
Robotic Devices as Therapeutic and Diagnostic Tools for Stroke Recovery
Arch Neurol, September 1, 2009; 66(9): 1086 - 1090.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Neurorehabil Neural RepairHome page
J. Chae, M. Y. Harley, T. Z. Hisel, C. M. Corrigan, J. A. Demchak, Y.-T. Wong, and Z.-P. Fang
Intramuscular Electrical Stimulation for Upper Limb Recovery in Chronic Hemiparesis: An Exploratory Randomized Clinical Trial
Neurorehabil Neural Repair, July 1, 2009; 23(6): 569 - 578.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Neurorehabil Neural RepairHome page
A.M. Hughes, C.T. Freeman, J.H. Burridge, P.H. Chappell, P.L. Lewin, and E. Rogers
Feasibility of Iterative Learning Control Mediated by Functional Electrical Stimulation for Reaching After Stroke
Neurorehabil Neural Repair, July 1, 2009; 23(6): 559 - 568.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Neurorehabil Neural RepairHome page
S. J. Housman, K. M. Scott, and D. J. Reinkensmeyer
A Randomized Controlled Trial of Gravity-Supported, Computer-Enhanced Arm Exercise for Individuals With Severe Hemiparesis
Neurorehabil Neural Repair, June 1, 2009; 23(5): 505 - 514.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 ptjournalHome page
A. M. Hammer and B. Lindmark
Author Response
Physical Therapy, June 1, 2009; 89(6): 541 - 542.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Clin RehabilHome page
M. Casadio, P. Giannoni, P. Morasso, and V. Sanguineti
A proof of concept study for the integration of robot therapy with physiotherapy in the treatment of stroke patients
Clinical Rehabilitation, March 1, 2009; 23(3): 217 - 228.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Neurorehabil Neural RepairHome page
B. H. Dobkin
Progressive Staging of Pilot Studies to Improve Phase III Trials for Motor Interventions
Neurorehabil Neural Repair, March 1, 2009; 23(3): 197 - 206.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Neurorehabil Neural RepairHome page
J. S. Knutson, T. Z. Hisel, M. Y. Harley, and J. Chae
A Novel Functional Electrical Stimulation Treatment for Recovery of Hand Function in Hemiplegia: 12-Week Pilot Study
Neurorehabil Neural Repair, January 1, 2009; 23(1): 17 - 25.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Neurorehabil Neural RepairHome page
A. C. Lo and E. W. Triche
Improving Gait in Multiple Sclerosis Using Robot-Assisted, Body Weight Supported Treadmill Training
Neurorehabil Neural Repair, November 1, 2008; 22(6): 661 - 671.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Neurorehabil Neural RepairHome page
T. A. Thrasher, V. Zivanovic, W. McIlroy, and M. R. Popovic
Rehabilitation of Reaching and Grasping Function in Severe Hemiplegic Patients Using Functional Electrical Stimulation Therapy
Neurorehabil Neural Repair, November 1, 2008; 22(6): 706 - 714.
[Abstract] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kwakkel, G.
Right arrow Articles by Krebs, H. I.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kwakkel, G.
Right arrow Articles by Krebs, H. I.
Right arrowPubmed/NCBI databases
Medline Plus Health Information
*Arm Injuries and Disorders
*Stroke
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Advertisement