Improvement of Arm Movement Patterns and Endpoint Control Depends on Type of Feedback During Practice in Stroke Survivors

¹ Department of Physiology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
² School of Physical and Occupational Therapy, McGill University, and Centre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation, Montreal, Quebec

^* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: mindy.levin{at}mcgill.ca.

	Abstract

Background. A major challenge in stroke rehabilitation is restoration of arm motor function. Therapy-induced improvements in arm function may occur via restoration of premorbid movement patterns (recovery) or development of compensatory movement strategies. However, it is unclear whether the learning benefits of practice might be enhanced by incorporating different forms of feedback, focusing on movement outcomes or on specific arm movement patterns. Objective.To determine if manipulation of attentional focus by providing either knowledge of results (KR) feedback, focusing on movement outcomes, or knowledge of performance (KP) feedback, focusing on arm movement patterns during repetitive practice of a pointing movement, may lead to arm motor recovery. Methods. Twenty-eight chronic stroke survivors were randomly assigned to 2 groups that practiced 10 sessions of 75 pointing movements. During practice, groups received either 20% KR about movement precision or faded (26.6% average) KP about arm joint movements. A nondisabled control group (n = 5) practiced the same task with KR. Results. Motor patterns recovered only in KP, as evidenced by immediate and long-term increases in joint range, better interjoint coordination in early movement phases, and generalization of gains. Improvements in clinical impairment and function were related to decreases in compensation (trunk rotation) and recovery of interjoint coordination in mid-movement phases. Conclusions. In stroke survivors, when the learners’ attention was directed to the movements themselves (KP), motor improvements reflect recovery compared to when attention was directed toward movement outcomes (KR).

First published on March 16, 2007, doi:10.1177/1545968306298414

Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair 2007;21:398.

A more recent version of this article appeared on October 1, 2007


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. E. Stoykov, G. N. Lewis, and D. M. Corcos Comparison of Bilateral and Unilateral Training for Upper Extremity Hemiparesis in Stroke Neurorehabil Neural Repair, November 1, 2009; 23(9): 945 - 953. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. L. Woodbury, D. R. Howland, T. E. McGuirk, S. B. Davis, C. R. Senesac, S. Kautz, and L. G. Richards Effects of Trunk Restraint Combined With Intensive Task Practice on Poststroke Upper Extremity Reach and Function: A Pilot Study Neurorehabil Neural Repair, January 1, 2009; 23(1): 78 - 91. [Abstract] [PDF]

				I. Eisner-Janowicz, S. Barbay, E. Hoover, A. M. Stowe, S. B. Frost, E. J. Plautz, and R. J. Nudo Early and Late Changes in the Distal Forelimb Representation of the Supplementary Motor Area After Injury to Frontal Motor Areas in the Squirrel Monkey J Neurophysiol, September 1, 2008; 100(3): 1498 - 1512. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. Broetz, S. R Soekadar, and N. Birbaumer On "A four-week, task-specific neuroprosthesis program..." Dunning K, et al. Phys Ther. 2008;88:397-405. Physical Therapy, August 1, 2008; 88(8): 970 - 970. [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. D. Takahashi, L. Der-Yeghiaian, V. Le, R. R. Motiwala, and S. C. Cramer Robot-based hand motor therapy after stroke Brain, February 1, 2008; 131(2): 425 - 437. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]