Differences between persons with right or left cerebral vascular accident on the assessment of motor and process skills

Bernspång, Birgitta; Fisher, Anne G.

doi:10.1016/s0003-9993(95)80124-3

Cited by 92 publications

(66 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, because we could not assess quality of performance on the AMAT, we could not examine the relationship between arm use after stroke and functional performance. However, most studies that have examined functional deficits after unilateral stroke have found a comparable level of impairment after RHD and LHD 35 suggesting the possibility that the differences we have reported in hand use may not be associated with differential functioning.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 57%

Arm Use After Left or Right Hemiparesis Is Influenced by Hand Preference

Rinehart

Singleton

Adair

et al. 2009

Stroke

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Purpose-Despite strong evidence for hand preference and its impact on motor performance, its influence on stroke rehabilitation has not been routinely considered. Previous research demonstrates that patients with hemiparetic stroke use their ipsilesional, nonparetic arm 5 to 6 times more frequently than their paretic arm, but it is unknown if such use varies with laterality of hemiparesis. The purpose of our study was to determine if the right arm is used more frequently in right-handed patients with stroke. Methods-We assessed relative use of the right, left, and both arms with wrist accelerometers on patients with unilateral, paretic stroke matched for degree of paresis (12 with right hemisphere damage, 17 with left hemisphere damage) and 25 neurologically intact control participants as they performed the Arm Motor Ability Test. Results-We showed: (1) ipsilesional arm use was greater after right hemisphere damage than left hemisphere damage; (2) the left hemisphere damage group used both arms together more often than the right hemisphere damage group but less often than the control group; and (3) both stroke groups used their contralesional, paretic arm to the same degree. Conclusions-These findings emphasize the influence of hand preference on arm use after stroke for the ipsilesional but not the contralesional arm. Although both stroke groups used their ipsilesional more than their contralesional arm, the difference was greater for the right hemisphere damage group who used their ipsilesional arm 4 times more frequently than their contralesional arm, whereas the left hemisphere damage group used their ipsilesional arm 2 times more frequently than their contralesional arm.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 57%

Arm Use After Left or Right Hemiparesis Is Influenced by Hand Preference

Rinehart

Singleton

Adair

et al. 2009

Stroke

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…31,35 No significant changes in ABILHAND measures were found as a function of the lesion location, width, and depth. This finding can be explained by (1) the chronicity of the lesion, allowing time for neural repair, either intrinsic or adaptive; (2) the exclusion of subjects with major cognitive deficits 36 ; and (3) the small number of cases representing each different type of brain damage, resulting in a low power to detect any difference.…”

Section: Relationship Between Abilhand and Clinical Presentationmentioning

confidence: 90%

The ABILHAND Questionnaire as a Measure of Manual Ability in Chronic Stroke Patients

Penta

Tesio

Arnould

et al. 2001

Stroke

247

245

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Purpose-Chronic hemiparetic patients often retain the ability to manage activities requiring both hands, either through the use of the affected arm or compensation with the unaffected limb. A measure of this overall ability was developed by adapting and validating the ABILHAND questionnaire through the Rasch measurement model. ABILHAND measures the patient's perceived difficulty in performing everyday manual activities. Methods-One hundred three chronic (Ͼ6 months) stroke outpatients (62% men; mean age, 63 years) were assessed (74 in Belgium, 29 in Italy). They lived at home and walked independently and were screened for the absence of major cognitive deficits (dementia, aphasia, hemineglect). The patients were administered the ABILHAND questionnaire, the Brunnström upper limb motricity test, the box-and-block manual dexterity test, the Semmes-Weinstein tactile sensation test, and the Geriatric Depression Scale. The brain lesion type and site were recorded. ABILHAND results were analyzed with the use of Winsteps Rasch software. Results-The Rasch refinement of ABILHAND led to a change from the original unimanual and bimanual 56-item, 4-level scale to a bimanual 23-item, 3-level scale. The resulting ability scale had sufficient sensitivity to be clinically useful. Rasch reliability was 0.90, and the item-difficulty hierarchy was stable across demographic and clinical subgroups. Grip strength, motricity, dexterity, and depression were significantly correlated with the ABILHAND measures. Key Words: arm Ⅲ disability evaluation Ⅲ rehabilitation Ⅲ stroke P oststroke hemiplegia is one of the most prevalent forms of motor disability, affecting approximately 1% of the population. 1 Although most current stroke survivors achieve an autonomous form of gait, a satisfactory recovery (if any) of the affected upper limb function is much more rare. Conclusions-TheAlthough several tests are available 2-4 for measuring upper limb function in terms of grip strength, dexterity, sensation, and performance in standardized manipulative tasks, the measurements are all made at the focal impairment level. 5 The actual disability, however, is far from linearly related to the underlying impairments. 6 It depends on complex interactions between upper limb function and compensatory behaviors of the person, such as using the unaffected limb or dividing complex movements into simpler ones. Moreover, the learning of new motor processes is influenced by the subject's motivational and emotional status, which is likely to be impaired by stroke. 7 Manual ability may be defined as the capacity to manage daily activities requiring the use of the upper limbs, whatever the strategies involved. Therefore, it should be measured per se and not simply inferred from focal impairments. Since it is a behavior, manual ability belongs to the domain of latent variables concealed within the person, such as pain, depression, and intelligence. The "amount" of manual ability can be inferred from observed activities and/or a patient's perceived difficul...

show abstract

“…All measures are expressed as logistically transformed probability measures (logits), which are linear measures that can be placed on an abstract continuum of greater or lesser ability. A cut-off criteria for a person's ability to remain independent living is set at 2.0 logits for the motor skill scale and at 1.0 for the process skill scale (Bernspang and Fisher 1995a;Fisher 2003). The AMPS has been validated for use in Sweden (Bernspang and Fisher 1995b).…”

Section: Activitymentioning

confidence: 99%