Meaningful Task-Specific Training (MTST) for Stroke Rehabilitation: A Randomized Controlled Trial

REFERENCES

• Chan DY, Chan CC, Au DK. Motor relearning programme for stroke patients: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Rehabil. 2006;20:191–200.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hubbard IJ, Parsons MW, Neilson C, Carey LM. Task-specific training: evidence for and translation to clinical practice. Occup Ther Int. 2009;16:175–189.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bayona NA, Bitensky J, Salter K, TeaseII R. The role of task-specific training in rehabilitation therapies. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2005;12:58–65.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Nudo RJ, Friel KM, Delia SW. Role of sensory deficits in motor impairments after injury to primary motor cortex. Neuropharmacology. 2000;39:733–742.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lynskey JV, Belanger A, Jung R. Activity-dependent plasticity in spinal cord injury. I Rehabil Res Dev. 2008;45:229–240.
   Google Scholar
• Cramer SC, Sur M, Dobkin BH, et al. Harnessing neuroplasticity for clinical applications. Brain. 2011;134:1591–1609.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jang SH, Kim YH, Cho SH., Lee IFI, Park JW, Kwon YH. Cortical reorganization induced by task-oriented training in chronic hemiplegic stroke patients. Neuro report. 2003;14:137–141.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luft AR, McCombe-Waller S, Whitall J, et al. Repetitive bilateral arm training and motor cortex activation in chronic stroke: A randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2004;292:1853–1861.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Richards L, Hanson C, Wellborn M, Sethi A. Driving motor recovery after stroke. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2008;15:397–411.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dobkin BH. Clinical practice. Rehabilitation after stroke. N Engl I Med. 2005;352:1677–1684.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gauthier LV, Taub E, Perkins C, Ortmann M, Mark VW, Uswatte G. Remodeling the brain: plastic structural brain changes produced by different motor therapies after stroke. Stroke. 2008;39:1520–1525.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harvey RL. Improving poststroke recovery: neuroplasticity and task-oriented training. Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med. 2009;11:251–259.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Schmidt RA. Motor Control and Learning: A Behavioral Emphasis. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics; 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Mulder T, Hochstenbach J. Adaptability and flexibility of the human motor system: Implications for neurological rehabilitation. Neural Plast. 2001;8:131–140.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Arya KN, Pandian S, Verma R, Garg RK. Movement therapy induced neural reorganization and motor recovery in stroke: a review. I Bodyw Mov Ther. 2011;15:528–537.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 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.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Daly JJ, Ruff RL. Construction of efficacious gait and upper limb functional interventions based on brain plasticity evidence and model-based measures for stroke patients. Sci World J. 2007;7:2031–2045.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kleim JA, Jones TA. Principles of experience-dependent neural plasticity: implications for rehabilitation after brain damage. I Speech Lang Hear Res. 2008;51:S225–239.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Donnan GA, Fisher M, Macleod M, Davis SM. Stroke. Lancet. 2008;371:1612–1623.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perry J, Garrett M, Gronley JK, Mulroy SJ. Classification of walking handicap in the stroke population. Stroke. 1995;26:982–989.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ganguli M, Ratcliff G, Chandra V, et al. A Hindi version of the MMSE: the development of a cognitive screening instrument for a largely illiterate rural elderly population in India. Intl Geriatr Psychiatry. 1995;10:367–377.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dancer S, Brown AJ, Yanase LR. National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale reliable and valid in plain English.J Neurosci Nurs. 2009;41:2–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sawner K, LaVigne J. Brunnstrom's Movement Therapy in Hemiplegia: A Neurophysiological Approach. Philadelphia: JB Lippincott; 1992.
   Google Scholar
• Page SJ, Sisto S, Johnston MV, Levine P. Modified constraint-induced therapy after subacute stroke: a preliminary study. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2002;16:290–295.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taub E, Uswatte G, King DK, Morris D, Crago JE, Chatterjee A. A placebo-controlled trial of constraint-induced movement therapy for upper extremity after stroke. Stroke. 2006;37:1045–1049.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bobath B. Adult Hemiplegia: Evaluation and Treatment. Butterworth-Heinemann; 1990.
   Google Scholar
• Fugl-Meyer AR, Jaasko L, Leyman I, Olsson S, Steglind S. The post-stroke hemiplegic patient. 1. A method for evaluation of physical performance. Scand I Rehabil Med. 1975;7:13–31.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Duncan PW, Propst M, Nelson SG. Reliability of the Fugl-Meyer assessment of sensorimotor recovery following cerebrovascular accident. Phys Ther. 1983;63:1606–1610.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gladstone DJ, Danells CJ, Black SE. The Fugl-Meyer assessment of motor recovery after stroke: a critical review of its measurement properties. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2002;16:232–240.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sanford J, Moreland J, Swanson LR, Stratford PW, Gowland C. Reliability of the Fugl-Meyer assessment for testing motor performance in patients following stroke. Phys Ther. 1993;73:447–454.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lang CE, Edwards DF, Birkenmeier RL, Dromerick AW. Estimating minimal clinically important differences of upper-extremity measures early after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2008;89:1693–1700.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van der Lee JFI, De Groot V, Beckerman H, Wagenaar RC, Lankhorst GJ, Bouter LM. The intra-and interrater reliability of the Action Research Arm Test: a practical test of upper extremity function in patients with stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2001;82:14–19.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin JFI, Hsu MJ, Sheu CF, Wu TS, Lin RT, Chen CH, Hsieh CL. Psychometric comparisons of 4 measures for assessing upper-extremity function in people with stroke. Phys Ther. 2009;89:840–850.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ang JFI, Man DW. The discriminative power of the Wolf Motor Function Test in assessing upper extremity functions in persons with stroke. Intl Rehabil Res. 2006;29:357–361.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woodbury M, Velozo CA, Thompson PA, et al. Measurement structure of the Wolf Motor Function Test: implications for motor control theory. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 24:791-801.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morris DM, Uswatte G, Crago JE, Cook EW, 3rd, Taub E. The reliability of the Wolf Motor Function Test for assessing upper extremity function after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2001;82: 750–755.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolf SL, Catlin PA, Ellis M, Archer AL, Morgan B, Piacentino A. Assessing Wolf Motor Function Test as outcome measure for research in patients after stroke. Stroke. 2001;32:1635–1639.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy Research Group. Manual:Graded Wolf Motor Function Test (Revised). University of Alabama at Birmingham and Birmingham Veteran's Administration Center. 2002.
   Google Scholar
• Bonifer NM, Anderson KM, Arciniegas DB. Constraint-induced movement therapy after stroke: efficacy for patients with minimal upper-extremity motor ability. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;86:1867–1873.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bonifer N, Anderson KM. Application of constraint-induced movement therapy for an individual with severe chronic upper-extremity hemiplegia. Phys Ther. 2003;83:384–398.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whitall J, Savin DN, Jr, Harris-Love M, Waller SM. Psychometric properties of a modified Wolf Motor Function Test for people with mild and moderate upper-extremity hemiparesis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2006;87:656–660.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uswatte G, Taub E, Morris D, Vignolo M, McCulloch K. Reliability and validity of the upper-extremity motor activity log-14 for measuring real-world arm use. Stroke. 2005;36:2493–2496.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy Research Group. Manual: Upper Extremity - Motor Activity Log. University of Alabama at Birmingham and Birmingham Veteran's Administration Center. 2004.
   Google Scholar
• van der Lee JFI, Beckerman H, Knol DL, de Vet HC, Bouter LM. Clinimetric properties of the motor activity log for the assessment of arm use in hemiparetic patients. Stroke. 2004;35:1410–1414.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verma R, Arya KN, Garg RK. Task-oriented circuit class training program with motor imagery for gait rehabilitation in poststroke patients: a randomized controlled trial. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2011;18 Suppl 1:620–632.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Johansson BB. Brain plasticity and stroke rehabilitation. The Willis Lecture. Stroke. 2000;31:223–230.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arya KN, Verma R, Garg RK. Estimating the minimal clinically important difference of an upper extremity recovery measure in subacute stroke patients. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2011; 18 Suppl 1: 599–610.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rose DK, Winstein Cl. Bimanual training after stroke: Are two hands better than one? Top Stroke Rehabil. 2004;11:20–30.
   Google Scholar
• Sleimen-Malkoun R, Temprado JJ, Thefenne L, Berton E. Bimanual training in stroke: How do coupling and symmetry-breaking matter? BMC Neurol. 2011;11: 11.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carson RG. Neural pathways mediating bilateral interactions between the upper limbs. Brain Res Brain Res Rev. 2005;49:641–662.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murase N, Duque J, Mazzocchio R, Cohen LG. Influence of interhemispheric interactions on motor function in chronic stroke. Ann Neurol. 2004;55:400–409.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levin MF, Kleim JA, Wolf SL. What do motor "recovery" and "compensation" mean in patients following stroke? Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2009;23:313–319.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hammer AM, Lindmark B. Effects of forced use on arm function in the subacute phase after stroke: a randomized, clinical pilot study. Phys Ther. 2009;89:526–539.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dromerick AW, Edwards DF, Hahn M. Does the application of constraint-induced movement therapy during acute rehabilitation reduce arm impairment after ischemic stroke? Stroke. 2000;31:2984–2988.
   Google Scholar
• Kollen BJ, Lennon S, Lyons B, et al. The effectiveness of the bobath concept in stroke rehabilitation: What is the evidence? Stroke. 2009;40:e89–97.
   Google Scholar
• Paci M. Physiotherapy based on the Bobath concept for adults with post-stroke hemiplegia: a review of effectiveness studies. I Rehabil Med. 2003;35:2–7.
   Google Scholar
• French B, Thomas LH, Leathley MJ, et al. Repetitive task training for improving functional ability after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007:CD006073
   Google Scholar
• Fure B, Wyller TB, Thommessen B. TOAST criteria applied in acute ischemic stroke. Acta Neurol Scand. 2005;112:254–258.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF, et al. Consort 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. I Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63:e1–37.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar