Program in Occupational Therapy, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Missouri.
Program in Occupational Therapy, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Missouri; Department of Psychiatry, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Missouri.
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2022 May;103(5):899-907. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2021.10.010. Epub 2021 Oct 30.
To identify how individuals respond to unilateral upper extremity peripheral nerve injury via compensation (increased use of the nondominant hand). We hypothesized that injury to the dominant hand would have a greater effect on hand use (left vs right choices). We also hypothesized that compensation would not depend on current (postinjury) nondominant hand performance because many patients undergo rehabilitation that is not designed to alter hand use.
Observational survey, single-arm.
Academic research institution and referral center.
A total of 48 adults (N=48) with unilateral upper extremity peripheral nerve injury. Another 14 declined participation. Referred sample, including all eligible patients from 16 months at 1 nerve injury clinic and 1 hand therapy clinic.
Not applicable.
Hand use (% of actions with each hand) via Block Building Task. Dexterity via Jebsen-Taylor Hand Function.
Participants preferred their dominant hand regardless of whether it was injured: hand usage (dominant/nondominant) did not differ from typical adults, regardless of injured side (P>.07), even though most participants (77%) were more dexterous with their uninjured nondominant hand (mean asymmetry index, -0.16±0.25). The Block Building Task was sensitive to hand dominance (P=2 × 10) and moderately correlated with Motor Activity Log amount scores (r=0.33, P<.0001). Compensation was associated only with dominant hand dexterity (P=3.9 × 10), not on nondominant hand dexterity, rehabilitation, or other patient and/or injury factors (P>.1).
Patients with peripheral nerve injury with dominant hand injury do not compensate with their unaffected nondominant hand, even if it is more dexterous. For the subset of patients unlikely to recover function with the injured hand, they could benefit from rehabilitation that encourages compensation with the nondominant hand.
通过代偿(增加对非优势手的使用)来确定个体对手部单侧周围神经损伤的反应。我们假设,优势手的损伤会对手的使用产生更大的影响(左手与右手的选择)。我们还假设,代偿不会依赖于当前(损伤后)非优势手的表现,因为许多患者接受的康复治疗并非旨在改变手的使用方式。
观察性调查,单臂。
学术研究机构和转诊中心。
共有 48 名成人(N=48)患有单侧上肢周围神经损伤。另有 14 人拒绝参与。来自 16 个月的 1 个神经损伤诊所和 1 个手部治疗诊所的所有合格患者的转诊样本。
不适用。
通过积木构建任务评估手的使用(每只手的动作百分比)。通过 Jebsen-Taylor 手部功能评估灵巧度。
无论其受伤手是否为优势手,参与者都更倾向于使用优势手:无论受伤侧如何(P>.07),手的使用(优势/非优势)与典型成年人并无不同,尽管大多数参与者(77%)使用未受伤的非优势手时更灵巧(平均不对称指数,-0.16±0.25)。积木构建任务对手的优势度敏感(P=2×10),与运动活动日志量评分中度相关(r=0.33,P<.0001)。代偿仅与优势手灵巧度相关(P=3.9×10),而非非优势手灵巧度、康复或其他患者和/或损伤因素(P>.1)。
手部单侧周围神经损伤且优势手损伤的患者不会通过未受伤的非优势手来代偿,即使非优势手更灵巧。对于不太可能通过受伤手恢复功能的患者亚组,他们可能会受益于鼓励通过非优势手代偿的康复治疗。