Interactions between imagined movement and the initiation of voluntary movement: A TMS study

Objective: The purpose was to examine motor imagery-induced enhancement in corticospinal excitability during a reaction time (RT) task. Methods: Nine young and healthy Subjects performed an isometric finger flexion tasks in response to a visual imperative cue. In the pre-cue period, they were instructed to: (I) rest; (2) imagine flexing their fingers isometrically (ImFlex): or (3) imagine extending their fingers isometrically (ImExt). Surface EMGs from the finger flexors and extensors were monitored to ensure EMG silence before movement onset. Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) was used to evaluate changes in motor-evoked potentials (MEP) in the finger flexor and extensor muscles during the response phase. TMS was delivered either with the imperative cue, or 120 ms before and after the imperative cue. Results: RT was slower when they were imagining finger extension prior to the visual imperative cue. MEPs were significantly increased for the finger flexors during imagined finger flexion and for the finger extensors during imagined finger extension at both TMS delivery time points, reflecting movement specific enhancement in corticospinal excitability during motor imagery. When TMS was delivered 120 ms after the cue, finger flexor MEN were further facilitated under the Rest and ImFlex conditions, but not under the ImExt condition, suggesting additive interactions between imagery-induced enhancement and early rise in corticospinal excitability during the initiation of a reaction time response. Conclusions: Our results provide neurophysiological evidence mediating dynamic interactions between imagined movement and the initiation of voluntary movement. Significance: Motor imagery can be integrated into a rehabilitation protocol to facilitate motor recovery. (C) 2009 International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved

Robot-assisted reaching exercise promotes arm movement recovery in chronic hemiparetic stroke: a randomized controlled pilot study

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Providing active assistance to complete desired arm movements is a common technique in upper extremity rehabilitation after stroke. Such active assistance may improve recovery by affecting somatosensory input, motor planning, spasticity or soft tissue properties, but it is labor intensive and has not been validated in controlled trials. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of robotically administered active-assistive exercise and compare those with free reaching voluntary exercise in improving arm movement ability after chronic stroke. METHODS: Nineteen individuals at least one year post-stroke were randomized into one of two groups. One group performed 24 sessions of active-assistive reaching exercise with a simple robotic device, while a second group performed a task-matched amount of unassisted reaching. The main outcome measures were range and speed of supported arm movement, range, straightness and smoothness of unsupported reaching, and the Rancho Los Amigos Functional Test of Upper Extremity Function. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: There were significant improvements with training for range of motion and velocity of supported reaching, straightness of unsupported reaching, and functional movement ability. These improvements were not significantly different between the two training groups. The group that performed unassisted reaching exercise improved the smoothness of their reaching movements more than the robot-assisted group. CONCLUSION: Improvements with both forms of exercise confirmed that repeated, task-related voluntary activation of the damaged motor system is a key stimulus to motor recovery following chronic stroke. Robotically assisting in reaching successfully improved arm movement ability, although it did not provide any detectable, additional value beyond the movement practice that occurred concurrently with it. The inability to detect any additional value of robot-assisted reaching may have been due to this pilot study's limited sample size, the specific diagnoses of the participants, or the inclusion of only individuals with chronic stroke

How a Diverse Research Ecosystem Has Generated New Rehabilitation Technologies: Review of NIDILRR’s Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers

Over 50 million United States citizens (1 in 6 people in the US) have a developmental, acquired, or degenerative disability. The average US citizen can expect to live 20% of his or her life with a disability. Rehabilitation technologies play a major role in improving the quality of life for people with a disability, yet widespread and highly challenging needs remain. Within the US, a major effort aimed at the creation and evaluation of rehabilitation technology has been the Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers (RERCs) sponsored by the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research. As envisioned at their conception by a panel of the National Academy of Science in 1970, these centers were intended to take a “total approach to rehabilitation”, combining medicine, engineering, and related science, to improve the quality of life of individuals with a disability. Here, we review the scope, achievements, and ongoing projects of an unbiased sample of 19 currently active or recently terminated RERCs. Specifically, for each center, we briefly explain the needs it targets, summarize key historical advances, identify emerging innovations, and consider future directions. Our assessment from this review is that the RERC program indeed involves a multidisciplinary approach, with 36 professional fields involved, although 70% of research and development staff are in engineering fields, 23% in clinical fields, and only 7% in basic science fields; significantly, 11% of the professional staff have a disability related to their research. We observe that the RERC program has substantially diversified the scope of its work since the 1970’s, addressing more types of disabilities using more technologies, and, in particular, often now focusing on information technologies. RERC work also now often views users as integrated into an interdependent society through technologies that both people with and without disabilities co-use (such as the internet, wireless communication, and architecture). In addition, RERC research has evolved to view users as able at improving outcomes through learning, exercise, and plasticity (rather than being static), which can be optimally timed. We provide examples of rehabilitation technology innovation produced by the RERCs that illustrate this increasingly diversifying scope and evolving perspective. We conclude by discussing growth opportunities and possible future directions of the RERC program

Control Strategies for the Transition From Multijoint to Single-Joint Arm Movements Studied Using a Simple Mechanical Constraint

Changes were studied in neuromotor control that were evoked by constraining the motion of the elbow joint during planar, supported movements of the dominant arm in eight normal human subjects. Electromyograph (EMG) recordings from shoulder and arm muscles were used to determine whether the normal multijoint muscle activity patterns associated with reaching to a visual target were modified when the movement was reduced to a single-joint task, by pinning the elbow to a particular location in the planar work space. Three blocks of 150 movements each were used in the experiments. Subjects were presented with the unconstrained task in the first and third blocks with an intervening block of constrained trials. Kinematic, dynamic, and EMG measures of performance were compared across blocks. The imposition of the pin constraint caused predictable changes in kinematic performance, in that near-linear motions of the hand became curved. This was followed by changes in limb dynamic performance at the elbow. However, changes in EMG activity at the shoulder lagged the kinematic changes substantially (by about 15 trials). The gradual character of the changes in EMG timing does not support a primary role for segmental reflex action in mediating the transition between multijoint and single-joint control strategies. Furthermore, the scope and magnitude of these changes argues against the notion that human motor performance is driven by the optimization of muscle- or joint-related criteria alone. The findings are best described as reflecting the actions of a feedforward adaptive controller that has properties that are modified progressively according to the environmental state

Robot-assisted movement training for the stroke-impaired arm: Does it matter what the robot does?

Robot-assisted movement training improves arm movement ability following acute and chronic stroke. Such training involves two interacting processes: the patient trying to move and the robot applying forces to the patient's arm. A fundamental principle of motor learning is that movement practice improves motor function; the role of applied robotic forces in improving motor function is still unclear. This article reviews our work addressing this question. Our pilot study using the Assisted Rehabilitation and Measurement (ARM) Guide, a linear robotic trainer, found that mechanically assisted reaching improved motor recovery similar to unassisted reaching practice. This finding is inconclusive because of the small sample size (n = 19), but suggest that future studies should carefully control the amount of voluntary movement practice delivered to justify the use of robotic forces. We are optimistic that robotic forces will ultimately show additional therapeutic benefits when coupled with movement practice. We justify this optimism here by comparing results from the ARM Guide and the Mirror Image Movement Enabler robotic trainer. This comparison suggests that requiring a patient to generate specific patterns of force before allowing movement is more effective than mechanically completing movements for the patient. We describe the engineering implementation of this "guided-force training" algorithm

Robot-assisted movement training for the stroke-impaired arm: Does it matter what the robot does?

Robot-assisted movement training improves arm movement ability following acute and chronic stroke. Such training involves two interacting processes: the patient trying to move and the robot applying forces to the patient's arm. A fundamental principle of motor learning is that movement practice improves motor function; the role of applied robotic forces in improving motor function is still unclear. This article reviews our work addressing this question. Our pilot study using the Assisted Rehabilitation and Measurement (ARM) Guide, a linear robotic trainer, found that mechanically assisted reaching improved motor recovery similar to unassisted reaching practice. This finding is inconclusive because of the small sample size (n = 19), but suggest that future studies should carefully control the amount of voluntary movement practice delivered to justify the use of robotic forces. We are optimistic that robotic forces will ultimately show additional therapeutic benefits when coupled with movement practice. We justify this optimism here by comparing results from the ARM Guide and the Mirror Image Movement Enabler robotic trainer. This comparison suggests that requiring a patient to generate specific patterns of force before allowing movement is more effective than mechanically completing movements for the patient. We describe the engineering implementation of this "guided-force training" algorithm