Journal of Korean Academy of Medicine & Therapy Science (대한치료과학회지)

The Korean Society of Medicine & Therapy Science (대한치료과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The Effect of Questions for Internal feedback on Functional Recovery and Task performance in chronic stroke patients

내재적 피드백을 위한 질문이 만성 뇌졸중 환자의 기능회복과 과제수행에 미치는 영향

  • 선화정 (효성요양병원) ;
  • 김희수 (한림성심대학교 물리치료과) ;
  • 우지혜 (한림성심대학교 물리치료과) ;
  • 유영열 (브론코기념병원 재활치료부)
  • Received : 2018.10.24
  • Accepted : 2018.12.13
  • Published : 2018.12.31
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of this study was to investigate questions and instructions for internal feedback effects on functional recovery and task performance while chronic stroke patients practised task-specific training. Method: Twenty-four chronic stroke patients were randomly divided into two groups; when patients performed same tasks, one was treated using questions and the other using instructions for internal feedback Both lasted 30 minutes, 5 times a week for 8 weeks. Outcome measures included Erasmus MC Modifications to the Nottingham Sensory Assessment (EmNSA), Measurement Properties of the Motor Evaluation Scale for Upper Extremity in Stroke patients (MESUPES), Chedoke Arm and Hand Activity Inventory (CAHAI), Korean version of Modified Barthel Index (K-MBI). Results: There were no significant differences between the two groups in EmNSA and K-MBI(p>.05). But, in MESUPES and CAHAI, there was significant difference between the two groups(p<.05). Conclusion: In this study, questions for internal feedback during task-specific training are more effective in improving upper extremity motor function and task performance than instructions for internal feedback.

Keywords

References

  1. Arya, K. N., Verma, R., Garg, R. K., Sharma, V. P., Agarwal, M., & Agarwal, G. G. (2012). Meaningful Task-Specific Training (MTST) for stroke rehabilitation; A randomized controlled trial. Top Stroke Rehabil, 19(3), 193-211. https://doi.org/10.1310/tsr1903-193
  2. Baldo, J. V., Paulraj, S. R., Curran, B. C., & Dronkers, N. F. (2015). Impaired reasoning and problem-solving in individuals with language impairment due to aphasia or language delay. Front Psychol, 26(6), 1523.
  3. Barreca, S. R., Stratford, P. W., Lambert, C. L., Masters, L. M. & Streiner, D. L. (2005). Test-retest reliability, validity, and sensitivity of the cheodoke arm and hand activity inventory: a new measure of upper-limb function for survivors of stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 86, 1616-1622. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2005.03.017
  4. Carey, L. M., Matyas, T. A., & Baum, C. (2018). Effects of Somatosensory Impairment on Participation After Stroke. Am J Occup Ther, 72(3), 7203205100p1-7203205100p10. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.2018.025114
  5. Chanubol, R., Wongphaet, P., Chavanich, N., Werner, C., Hesse, S., Bardeleben, A., Bardeleben, A. et al. (2012). A randomized controlled trial of cognitive sensory motor training therapy on the recovery of arm function in acute stroke patients. Clin Rehabil, 26(12), 1096-1104. https://doi.org/10.1177/0269215512444631
  6. Choi, Y. I., Kim, W. H., Park, E. Y. & Kim, E. J. (2012). The validity, realiability and discriminative index of the Korean version of modified barthel index (K-MBI) in stroke patients. Korea Academia-Industrial Cooperation Society, 13(9), 4119-4125. https://doi.org/10.5762/KAIS.2012.13.9.4119
  7. Cristea, M. C., & Levin, M. F. (2007). Improvement of arm movement patterns and endpoint control depends on type of feedback during practice in stroke survivors. Neurorehabil Neural Repair, (21), 398-411.
  8. Fleming, M. K., Sorinola, I. O., Roverts-Lewis, S. F., Wolfe, C. D., Wellwood, I., & Newham, D. J. (2014). The effect of combined somatosensory stimulation and task-specific training on upper limb function in chronic stroke: A double-blind randomized controlled trial. Neurorehabil Nueral Repair, 29(2), 143-152.
  9. Harrison, S. L., Laver, K. E., Ninnis, K., Rowett, C., Lannin, N. A., & Crotty, M. (2018). Effectiveness of external cues to facilitate task performance in people with neurological disorders: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Disabil Rehabil, 9, 1-8.
  10. Johansson, G. M. & Hager, C. K. (2012) Measurement properties of the motor evaluation sacle for upper extremity in storke patients (MESUPES). Disabil Rehabil, 34(4), 288-294. https://doi.org/10.3109/09638288.2011.606343
  11. Johnson, D., Harris, J. E., Stratford, P., & Richardson, J. (2018). Interrater reliability of three versions of the Chedoke arm and hand activity inventory. Physiother Can, 70(2), 133-140. https://doi.org/10.3138/ptc.2016-70
  12. Kim, Y. S. (2014). The effectiveness of cognitive therapeutic exercise on upper extremity function and activities of daily living in stroke patients. J Neurocog Rehabil, 6, 41-46.
  13. Koganemaru, S., Sawamoto, N., Aso, T., Sagara, A., Ikkaku, T., Shimada, K., et al. (2014). Task-specific brain reorganization in motor recovery induced by a hybrid-rehabilitation combining training with brain stimulation after stroke. Neurosci Res, 92, 29-38.
  14. Lee, J. W., & Jeong, W. M. (2014). Neurocognitive rehabilitation. Seoul, Korea: Hakjisa.
  15. Lee, S. H., Bae, S. H., Jeon, D. J., & Kim, K. Y. (2015). The effect of cognitive exercise therapy on chronic stroke patients' upper limb function, activities of daily living and quality of life. J Phys Ther Sci, 27(9), 2787-2791. https://doi.org/10.1589/jpts.27.2787
  16. Sacco, R. L., Kasner, S. E., Broderick, J. P., Caplan, L. R., Connors, J. J., Culebras, A., et al. (2013). An updated definition of stroke for the 21st century: A statement for healthcare professionals from the American heart association/ American stroke association. Stroke, 44(7), 2064-2089. https://doi.org/10.1161/STR.0b013e318296aeca
  17. Salles, L., Martin-Casas, P., Girones, X., Dura, M. J., Lafuente, J. V., Perfetti, C. (2017). A neurocognitive approach for recovering upper extremity movement following subacute stroke; a randomized controlled pilot study. J Phys Ther Sci, 29(4), 665-672. https://doi.org/10.1589/jpts.29.665
  18. Shumwa-Cook, A. & Woollacott, M. (2012). Motor control translating research into clinical practice (4th ed.). USA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
  19. Stolk-Hornsveld, F., Crow J. L., Hendriks, E. P., van der Baan, R. & Harmeling-van der Wel, B. C. (2006). The erasmus MC modifications ot the (revised) nottingham sensory assessment: A reliable somatosensory assessment measure for patients with intracranial disorders. Clin Rehabil, 20(2), 160-172. https://doi.org/10.1191/0269215506cr932oa
  20. Storberget, M., Grodahl, L. H., Snodgrass, S., van Vliet, P., & Heneghan, N. (2017). Verbal augmented feedback in he rehabilitation of lower extremity musculoskeletal dysfunctions; a systematic review. BMJ Open Sport Exerc Med, 3(1), e000256. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjsem-2017-000256
  21. Sullvian, J., Girardi, M., Hensley, M., Rohaus, J., Schewe, C., Whittey, C., et al. (2015). Improving arm function in chronic stroke: a pilot study of sensory amplitude electrical stimulation via glove electrode during task-specific training. Top Stroke Rehabil, 22(3), 169-175. https://doi.org/10.1179/1074935714Z.0000000007
  22. Tatuene, J. K., Allali, G., Saj, A., Bernati, T., Sztajzel, R., Pollak, P., Momjian-Mayor, I. (2016). Incidence, risk factors and anatomy of peripersonal visuospatial neglect in acute stroke. Eur Neurol, 75(3-4), 157-163. https://doi.org/10.1159/000444709
  23. Villepinte, C., Cetella, E., Magali, M., Hidalgo, S., Techene, S., Lebely, C., et al. (2018). Validation of French upper limb Erasmus modified Nottingham sensory assessment in stroke. Ann Phys Rehabil Med, 60, e3-e4.