Urbin M A, Waddell Kimberly J, Lang Catherine E
Program in Physical Therapy, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO.
Program in Physical Therapy, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO.
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2015 May;96(5):854-61. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2014.11.018. Epub 2014 Dec 9.
To (1) determine whether acceleration metrics derived from monitoring outside of treatment are responsive to change in upper extremity (UE) function; and secondarily to (2) compare metric values during task-specific training and while in the free-living environment, and (3) establish metric associations with an in-clinic measure of movement capabilities.
Before-after observational study.
Inpatient hospital (primary purpose); outpatient hospital (secondary purpose).
Individuals (n=8) with UE hemiparesis <30 days poststroke (primary purpose); individuals (n=27) with UE hemiparesis ≥6 months poststroke (secondary purpose).
The inpatient sample was evaluated for UE movement capabilities and monitored with wrist-worn accelerometers for 22 hours outside of treatment before and after multiple sessions of task-specific training. The outpatient sample was evaluated for UE movement capabilities and monitored during a single session of task-specific training and the subsequent 22 hours outside clinical settings.
Action Research Arm Test (ARAT) and acceleration metrics quantified from accelerometer recordings.
Five metrics improved in the inpatient sample, along with UE function as measured on the ARAT: use ratio, magnitude ratio, variation ratio, median paretic UE acceleration magnitude, and paretic UE acceleration variability. Metric values were greater during task-specific training than in the free-living environment, and each metric was strongly associated with ARAT score.
Multiple metrics that characterize different aspects of UE movement are responsive to change in function. Metric values are different during training than in the free-living environment, providing further evidence that what the paretic UE does in the clinic may not generalize to what it does in everyday life.
(1)确定从治疗之外的监测中得出的加速度指标是否能反映上肢(UE)功能的变化;其次,(2)比较特定任务训练期间和自由生活环境中的指标值,以及(3)建立指标与临床运动能力测量之间的关联。
前后观察性研究。
住院医院(主要目的);门诊医院(次要目的)。
中风后<30天的UE偏瘫个体(n = 8)(主要目的);中风后≥6个月的UE偏瘫个体(n = 27)(次要目的)。
对住院样本进行UE运动能力评估,并在多节特定任务训练前后,用腕部佩戴的加速度计在治疗之外监测22小时。对门诊样本进行UE运动能力评估,并在单节特定任务训练期间以及随后的22小时非临床环境中进行监测。
行动研究臂测试(ARAT)和从加速度计记录中量化的加速度指标。
住院样本中的五个指标有所改善,同时ARAT测量的UE功能也有所改善:使用比率、幅度比率、变化比率、患侧UE加速度幅度中位数和患侧UE加速度变异性。特定任务训练期间的指标值高于自由生活环境中的指标值,并且每个指标都与ARAT评分密切相关。
表征UE运动不同方面的多个指标对功能变化有反应。训练期间的指标值与自由生活环境中的不同,这进一步证明了患侧UE在临床中的表现可能无法推广到其在日常生活中的表现。