|
Mimouni-Bloch, A., Shaklai, S., Levin, M., Ingber, M., Karolitsky, T., Grunbaum, S., et al. (2023). Developmental and acquired brain injury have opposite effects on finger coordination in children. Front. Hum. Neurosci., 17, 1083304.
|
Levin, M. F., Berman, S., Weiss, N., Parmet, Y., Banina, M. C., Frenkel-Toledo, S., et al. (2023). ENHANCE proof-of-concept three-arm randomized trial: effects of reaching training of the hemiparetic upper limb restricted to the spasticity-free elbow range (Vol. 13).
Abstract: Post-stroke motor recovery processes remain unknown. Timescales and patterns of upper-limb (UL) recovery suggest a major impact of biological factors, with modest contributions from rehabilitation. We assessed a novel impairment-based training motivated by motor control theory where reaching occurs within the spasticity-free elbow range. Patients with subacute stroke (</= 6 month; n = 46) and elbow flexor spasticity were randomly allocated to a 10-day UL training protocol, either personalized by restricting reaching to the spasticity-free elbow range defined by the tonic stretch reflex threshold (TSRT) or non-personalized (non-restricted) and with/without anodal transcranial direct current stimulation. Outcomes assessed before, after, and 1 month post-intervention were elbow flexor TSRT angle and reach-to-grasp arm kinematics (primary) and stretch reflex velocity sensitivity, clinical impairment, and activity (secondary). Results were analyzed for 3 groups as well as those of the effects of impairment-based training. Clinical measures improved in both groups. Spasticity-free range training resulted in faster and smoother reaches, smaller (i.e., better) arm-plane path length, and closer-to-normal shoulder/elbow movement patterns. Non-personalized training improved clinical scores without improving arm kinematics, suggesting that clinical measures do not account for movement quality. Impairment-based training within a spasticity-free elbow range is promising since it may improve clinical scores together with arm movement quality.Clinical Trial Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique Identifier: NCT02725853; Initial registration date: 01/04/2016.
|
Liebermann, D. G., Levin, M. F., McIntyre, J., Weiss, P. L., & Berman, S. (2010). Arm path fragmentation and spatiotemporal features of hand reaching in healthy subjects and stroke patients. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc, 2010, 5242–5245.
Abstract: Arm motion in healthy humans is characterized by smooth and relatively short paths. The current study focused on 3D reaching in stroke patients. Sixteen right-hemiparetic stroke patients and 8 healthy adults performed 42 reaching movements towards 3 visual targets located at an extended arm distance. Performance was assessed in terms of spatial and temporal features of the movement; i.e., hand path, arm posture and smoothness. Differences between groups and within subjects were hypothesized for spatial and temporal aspects of reaching under the assumption that both are independent. As expected, upper limb motion of patients was characterized by longer and jerkier hand paths and slower speeds. Assessment of the number of sub-movements within each movement did not clearly discriminate between groups. Principal component analyses revealed specific clusters of either spatial or temporal measures, which accounted for a large proportion of the variance in patients but not in healthy controls. These findings support the notion of a separation between spatial and temporal features of movement. Stroke patients may fail to integrate the two aspects when executing reaching movements towards visual targets.
|
Shaklai, S., Mimouni-Bloch, A., Levin, M., & Friedman, J. (2017). Development of finger force coordination in children. Experimental Brain Research, 235(12), 3709–3720.
Abstract: Coordination is often observed as body parts moving together. However, when producing force with multiple fingers, the optimal coordination is not to produce similar forces with each finger, but rather for each finger to correct mistakes of other fingers. In this study, we aim to determine whether and how this skill develops in children aged 4-12 years. We measured this sort of coordination using the uncontrolled manifold hypothesis (UCM). We recorded finger forces produced by 60 typically developing children aged between 4 and 12 years in a finger-pressing task. The children controlled the height of an object on a screen by the total amount of force they produced on force sensors. We found that the synergy index, a measure of the relationship between “good” and “bad” variance, increased linearly as a function of age. This improvement was achieved by a selective reduction in “bad” variance rather than an increase in “good” variance. We did not observe differences between males and females, and the synergy index was not able to predict outcomes of upper limb behavioral tests after controlling for age. As children develop between the ages of 4 and 12 years, their ability to produce negative covariation between their finger forces improves, likely related to their improved ability to perform dexterous tasks.
|
Frenkel-Toledo, S., Yamanaka, J., Friedman, J., Feldman, A. G., & Levin, M. F. (2019). Referent control of anticipatory grip force during reaching in stroke: an experimental and modeling study. Exp Brain Res, 237(7), 1655–1672.
Abstract: To evaluate normal and impaired control of anticipatory grip force (GF) modulation, we compared GF production during horizontal arm movements in healthy and post-stroke subjects, and, based on a physiologically feasible dynamic model, determined referent control variables underlying the GF-arm motion coordination in each group. 63% of 13 healthy and 48% of 13 stroke subjects produced low sustained initial force (< 10 N) and increased GF prior to arm movement. Movement-related GF increases were higher during fast compared to self-paced arm extension movements only in the healthy group. Differences in the patterns of anticipatory GF increases before the arm movement onset between groups occurred during fast extension arm movement only. In the stroke group, longer delays between the onset of GF change and elbow motion were related to clinical upper limb deficits. Simulations showed that GFs could emerge from the difference between the actual and the referent hand aperture (Ra) specified by the CNS. Similarly, arm movement could result from changes in the referent elbow position (Re) and could be affected by the co-activation (C) command. A subgroup of stroke subjects, who increased GF before arm movement, could specify different patterns of the referent variables while reproducing the healthy typical pattern of GF-arm coordination. Stroke subjects, who increased GF after arm movement onset, also used different referent strategies than controls. Thus, altered anticipatory GF behavior in stroke subjects may be explained by deficits in referent control.
|
