Daily steps, walking tests, and functioning in chronic stroke; comparing independent walkers to device-users.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Community mobility post-stroke is important for gaining independence in daily activities. Walking devices can facilitate mobility, but it remains unclear whether individuals who use a walking device walk as many daily steps as those who do not require a device. It is also unclear whether these groups differ in their independence in daily living. This study aimed (1) to compare daily steps, walking tests, and independence in basic and instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) six months post-stroke between individuals who walk independently and individuals who use a walking device, (2) within each group to assess correlations between daily steps and walking tests, independence in basic and IADL. METHODS: Thirty-seven community-dwelling individuals with chronic stroke; 22 participants used a walking-device and 15 participants walked independently. Daily steps were calculated as a 3-day mean by hip accelerometers. Clinical walking tests included the 10-m-walk-test, Timed Up & Go and 'Walking While Talking'. Daily living was assessed using the Functional-Independence Measure and the IADL questionnaire. RESULTS: Daily steps of the device-users were significantly lower than the independent-walkers (195-8068 versus 147-14010 steps/day) but independence in daily living was not significantly different. Different walking tests correlated with daily steps for device-users and independent-walkers. CONCLUSIONS: This preliminary investigation in chronic stroke revealed that device-users walk significantly fewer daily steps but are as independent in daily living as independent-walkers. Clinicians should differentiate between individuals with and without a walking device and the use of different clinical walking tests to explain daily steps should be considered. Further research is needed to assess the impact of a walking device post-stroke.

Assessing upper extremity-cognitive dual-task ability in neurological populations: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Dual-task involves performing cognitive and motor tasks together, which requires executive functions that may be impaired in individuals with neurological conditions. Therefore, it is important to accurately assess executive functions to plan a therapeutic intervention. OBJECTIVE: To characterize the use of upper extremity-cognitive dual-task assessment and to describe variables correlated with dual-task ability. METHODS: An electronic search of databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and PsycINFO) was carried out using a combination of the following terms: upper-extremity, dual/concurrent task, and cognitive/motor tasks. Two reviewers independently completed data extraction and assessed study quality. RESULTS: 1,946 studies were identified; 25 studies met the inclusion criteria. The purpose of using an upper extremity-cognitive dual-task assessment varied between studies as well as the upper extremity motor tasks used: pegboard (N = 14), arm curl (N = 9), finger-tapping (N = 3), and reaching (N = 1) tests. Dual-task ability was reported as the motor-cognitive interference (N = 15) and as motor cost (N = 12). Dual-task ability was correlated to cognition, brain activity, and daily function, and was significantly different between healthy and neurological individuals. CONCLUSION: Upper extremity cognitive dual-task paradigm is gaining popularity in clinical research, but lacks standardized tools, testing procedures, and calculations. A structured assessment procedure is needed for clinical use and future research.

Central Sensitization and Psychological State Distinguishing Complex Regional Pain Syndrome from Other Chronic Limb Pain Conditions: A Cluster Analysis Model.

Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) taxonomy has been updated with reported subtypes and is defined as primary pain alongside other chronic limb pain (CLP) conditions. We aimed at identifying CRPS clinical phenotypes that distinguish CRPS from other CLP conditions. Cluster analysis was carried out to classify 61 chronic CRPS and 31 CLP patients based on evoked pain (intensity of hyperalgesia and dynamic allodynia, allodynia area, and after-sensation) and psychological (depression, kinesiophobia, mental distress, and depersonalization) measures. Pro-inflammatory cytokine IL-6 and TNF-α serum levels were measured. Three cluster groups were created: 'CRPS' (78.7% CRPS; 6.5% CLP); 'CLP' (64.5% CLP; 4.9% CRPS), and 'Mixed' (16.4% CRPS; 29% CLP). The groups differed in all measures, predominantly in allodynia and hyperalgesia (p < 0.001, η² > 0.58). 'CRPS' demonstrated higher psychological and evoked pain measures vs. 'CLP'. 'Mixed' exhibited similarities to 'CRPS' in psychological profile and to 'CLP' in evoked pain measures. The serum level of TNF-αwas higher in the 'CRPS' vs. 'CLP' (p < 0.001) groups. In conclusion, pain hypersensitivity reflecting nociplastic pain mechanisms and psychological state measures created different clinical phenotypes of CRPS and possible CRPS subtypes, which distinguishes them from other CLP conditions, with the pro-inflammatory TNF-α cytokine as an additional potential biomarker.