Model-Based Analyses for the Causal Relationship Between Post-stroke Impairments and Functional Brain Connectivity Regarding the Effects of Kinesthetic Illusion Therapy Combined With Conventional Exercise
Abstract:Aims: Therapy with kinesthetic illusion of segmental body part induced by visual stimulation (KINVIS) may allow the treatment of severe upper limb motor deficits in post-stroke patients. Herein, we investigated: (1) whether the effects of KINVIS therapy with therapeutic exercise (TherEx) on motor functions were induced through improved spasticity, (2) the relationship between resting-state functional connectivity (rs-FC) and motor functions before therapy, and (3) the baseline characteristics of rs-FC in patie… Show more
“…Miyawaki et al's ndings 52 suggested that the impact of KI on upper limb motor function was mediated indirectly through its in uence on spasticity. In this study, the attention scores of participants during motor imagery tasks were displayed in real-time on a screen, providing them with visual feedback of their brain activity.…”
Background
Most stroke survivors have upper extremity dysfunction. According to neuroplasticity theory, transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and kinesthetic motor imagery-based brain computer interface (KI-BCI) have the potential to improve the upper extremity function of participants with subacute stroke. However, the efficacy of tDCS combined with KI-BCI in participants with subacute stroke is unknown.
Objective
To investigate whether the combined effect of tDCS and KI-BCI on upper limb function in participants with subacute stroke is more effective than the effects of tDCS or KI-BCI alone.
Methods
We randomized 48 participants into a tDCS group (n = 16), a KI-BCI group (n = 16), and a tDCS-BCI group (n = 16). Participants in the tDCS group received 30 min of tDCS with the anode over M1. The KI-BCI group performed 30 min of KI-BCI training. Participants in the tDCS-BCI group received 15 min of tDCS and 15 min of KI-BCI. All participants received conventional intervention. The treatment cycle consisted of a 1 session each day, 5 days per week for 4 weeks. The Fugl–Meyer Assessment of Upper Extremity (FMA-UE) subscale, Motor Status Scale (MSS), Action Research Arm Test (ARAT), and Modified Barthel Index (MBI) were used to assess upper limb function, and activities of daily living (ADL) before and after the 4-week treatment period. In addition, electroencephalography (EEG) was used to explore potential clinical brain mechanisms.
Results
After four weeks of intervention, the tDCS-BCI group was superior to the tDCS group in terms of the MSS. The FMA-UE, MSS, and MBI scores of the KI-BCI group were superior to those of the tDCS group. There was no difference in the number of quantitative EEGs among the three groups, while the number of quantitative EEGs was greater than before.
Conclusion
TDCS combined with KI-CI training can improve upper extremity function. However, KI-BCI training alone can improve upper limb function and ADL simultaneously. TDCS could alter the electrical excitatory levels of the cerebral hemispheres.
Trial registry number: ChiCTR2000034730
“…Miyawaki et al's ndings 52 suggested that the impact of KI on upper limb motor function was mediated indirectly through its in uence on spasticity. In this study, the attention scores of participants during motor imagery tasks were displayed in real-time on a screen, providing them with visual feedback of their brain activity.…”
Background
Most stroke survivors have upper extremity dysfunction. According to neuroplasticity theory, transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and kinesthetic motor imagery-based brain computer interface (KI-BCI) have the potential to improve the upper extremity function of participants with subacute stroke. However, the efficacy of tDCS combined with KI-BCI in participants with subacute stroke is unknown.
Objective
To investigate whether the combined effect of tDCS and KI-BCI on upper limb function in participants with subacute stroke is more effective than the effects of tDCS or KI-BCI alone.
Methods
We randomized 48 participants into a tDCS group (n = 16), a KI-BCI group (n = 16), and a tDCS-BCI group (n = 16). Participants in the tDCS group received 30 min of tDCS with the anode over M1. The KI-BCI group performed 30 min of KI-BCI training. Participants in the tDCS-BCI group received 15 min of tDCS and 15 min of KI-BCI. All participants received conventional intervention. The treatment cycle consisted of a 1 session each day, 5 days per week for 4 weeks. The Fugl–Meyer Assessment of Upper Extremity (FMA-UE) subscale, Motor Status Scale (MSS), Action Research Arm Test (ARAT), and Modified Barthel Index (MBI) were used to assess upper limb function, and activities of daily living (ADL) before and after the 4-week treatment period. In addition, electroencephalography (EEG) was used to explore potential clinical brain mechanisms.
Results
After four weeks of intervention, the tDCS-BCI group was superior to the tDCS group in terms of the MSS. The FMA-UE, MSS, and MBI scores of the KI-BCI group were superior to those of the tDCS group. There was no difference in the number of quantitative EEGs among the three groups, while the number of quantitative EEGs was greater than before.
Conclusion
TDCS combined with KI-CI training can improve upper extremity function. However, KI-BCI training alone can improve upper limb function and ADL simultaneously. TDCS could alter the electrical excitatory levels of the cerebral hemispheres.
Trial registry number: ChiCTR2000034730
“…Recently, visual-motor illusion (VMI), in which kinesthetic sensation is induced by visual stimulation, has been reported to be effective in improving motor function in hemiplegic patients [ 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 ]. VMI induces the illusion of movement in the subject’s limbs, even though they are not moving, by overlaying an image showing the movements of the limbs on the actual subject’s limbs for observation [ 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the degree of SoO and the degree of brain network activation are reported to be greater with VMI than with AOT [ 21 ]. Numerous previous reports have indicated that VMI led to improved upper limb function in hemiplegic patients [ 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 ]. In addition, for paralyzed ankle joints, VMI has led to an increase in the voluntary ankle dorsiflexion angle, suppression of muscle tone in the antagonist muscle, and improvement in standing movements and walking ability [ 13 , 14 ].…”
Visual-motor illusion (VMI) is an intervention to induce kinesthetic sensation from visual stimuli. We aimed to compare the effects of VMI of different visual stimuli on the paralyzed side ankle joint of stroke hemiplegic patients (hemiplegic patients) and to clarify their indication. We applied two types of VMI images of ankle dorsiflexion: ankle dorsiflexion without resistance (standard VMI (S-VMI)) and maximum effort dorsiflexion with resistance (power VMI (P-VMI)). Twenty-two hemiplegic patients were divided into two groups: Group A, which received S-VMI first and P-VMI one week later (n = 11), and Group B, which received P-VMI first and S-VMI one week later (n = 11). Immediate effects were evaluated. Outcomes were the dorsiflexion angle and angular velocity, degree of sense of agency (SoA), and sense of ownership. Patient’s characteristics of cognitive flexibility were assessed using the Trail making test-B (TMT-B). Fugl-Meyer assessment and the Composite-Spasticity-Scale were also assessed. P-VMI was significantly higher than S-VMI in SoA and dorsiflexion angular velocity. Additionally, the degree of improvement in dorsiflexion function with P-VMI was related to TMT-B and degree of muscle tone. Therefore, P-VMI improves ankle function in hemiplegic patients more than S-VMI but should be performed with cognitive flexibility and degree of muscle tone in mind.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.