Altered Dynamic Resting State Functional Connectivity Associated With Somatosensory Impairments in the Upper Limb in the Early Sub-Acute Phase Post-Stroke.

BACKGROUND.: Altered dynamic functional connectivity has been associated with motor impairments in the acute phase post-stroke. Its association with somatosensory impairments in the early sub-acute phase remains unexplored. OBJECTIVE.: To investigate altered dynamic functional connectivity associated with somatosensory impairments in the early sub-acute phase post-stroke. METHODS.: We collected resting state magnetic resonance imaging and clinical somatosensory function of the upper limb of 20 subacute stroke patients and 16 healthy controls (HC). A sliding-window approach was used to identify 3 connectivity states based on the estimated dynamic functional connectivity of sensorimotor related networks. Network components were subdivided into 3 domains: cortical and subcortical sensorimotor, as well as cognitive control network. Between-group differences were investigated using independent t-tests and Mann-Whitney-U tests. Analyzes were performed with correction for age, head motion and time post-stroke and corrected for multiple comparisons. RESULTS.: Stroke patients spent significantly less time in a weakly connected network state (state 3; dwell time: pstate3 = 0.003, meanstroke = 53.02, SDstroke = 53.13; meanHC = 118.92, SDHC = 72.84), and stayed shorter but more time intervals in a highly connected intra-domain network state (state 1; fraction time: pstate 1 < 0.001, meanstroke = 0.46, SDstroke = 0.26; meanHC = 0.26, SDHC = 0.21) compared to HC. After 8 weeks of therapy, improvements in wrist proprioception were moderately associated with decreases in dwell and fraction times toward a more normalized pattern. CONCLUSION.: Changes in temporal properties of large-scale network interactions are present in the early rehabilitation phase post-stroke and could indicate enhanced neural plasticity. These findings could augment the understanding of cerebral reorganization after loss of neural tissue specialized in somatosensory functions.

Trunk training following stroke.

BACKGROUND: Previous systematic reviews and randomised controlled trials have investigated the effect of post-stroke trunk training. Findings suggest that trunk training improves trunk function and activity or the execution of a task or action by an individual. But it is unclear what effect trunk training has on daily life activities, quality of life, and other outcomes. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of trunk training after stroke on activities of daily living (ADL), trunk function, arm-hand function or activity, standing balance, leg function, walking ability, and quality of life when comparing with both dose-matched as non-dose-matched control groups. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and five other databases to 25 October 2021. We searched trial registries to identify additional relevant published, unpublished, and ongoing trials. We hand searched the bibliographies of included studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We selected randomised controlled trials comparing trunk training versus non-dose-matched or dose-matched control therapy including adults (18 years or older) with either ischaemic or haemorrhagic stroke. Outcome measures of trials included ADL, trunk function, arm-hand function or activity, standing balance, leg function, walking ability, and quality of life. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Two main analyses were carried out. The first analysis included trials where the therapy duration of control intervention was non-dose-matched with the therapy duration of the experimental group and the second analysis where there was comparison with a dose-matched control intervention (equal therapy duration in both the control as in the experimental group).  MAIN RESULTS: We included 68 trials with a total of 2585 participants. In the analysis of the non-dose-matched groups (pooling of all trials with different training duration in the experimental as in the control intervention), we could see that trunk training had a positive effect on ADL (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.96; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69 to 1.24; P < 0.001; 5 trials; 283 participants; very low-certainty evidence), trunk function (SMD 1.49, 95% CI 1.26 to 1.71; P < 0.001; 14 trials, 466 participants; very low-certainty evidence), arm-hand function (SMD 0.67, 95% CI 0.19 to 1.15; P = 0.006; 2 trials, 74 participants; low-certainty evidence), arm-hand activity (SMD 0.84, 95% CI 0.009 to 1.59; P = 0.03; 1 trial, 30 participants; very low-certainty evidence), standing balance (SMD 0.57, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.79; P < 0.001; 11 trials, 410 participants; very low-certainty evidence), leg function (SMD 1.10, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.63; P < 0.001; 1 trial, 64 participants; very low-certainty evidence), walking ability (SMD 0.73, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.94; P < 0.001; 11 trials, 383 participants; low-certainty evidence) and quality of life (SMD 0.50, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.89; P = 0.01; 2 trials, 108 participants; low-certainty evidence). Non-dose-matched trunk training led to no difference for the outcome serious adverse events (odds ratio: 7.94, 95% CI 0.16 to 400.89; 6 trials, 201 participants; very low-certainty evidence). In the analysis of the dose-matched groups (pooling of all trials with equal training duration in the experimental as in the control intervention), we saw that trunk training had a positive effect on trunk function (SMD 1.03, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.16; P < 0.001; 36 trials, 1217 participants; very low-certainty evidence), standing balance (SMD 1.00, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.15; P < 0.001; 22 trials, 917 participants; very low-certainty evidence), leg function (SMD 1.57, 95% CI 1.28 to 1.87; P < 0.001; 4 trials, 254 participants; very low-certainty evidence), walking ability (SMD 0.69, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.87; P < 0.001; 19 trials, 535 participants; low-certainty evidence) and quality of life (SMD 0.70, 95% CI 0.29 to 1.11; P < 0.001; 2 trials, 111 participants; low-certainty evidence), but not for ADL (SMD 0.10; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.17 to 0.37; P = 0.48; 9 trials; 229 participants; very low-certainty evidence), arm-hand function (SMD 0.76, 95% CI -0.18 to 1.70; P = 0.11; 1 trial, 19 participants; low-certainty evidence), arm-hand activity (SMD 0.17, 95% CI -0.21 to 0.56; P = 0.38; 3 trials, 112 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Trunk training also led to no difference for the outcome serious adverse events (odds ratio (OR): 7.39, 95% CI 0.15 to 372.38; 10 trials, 381 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Time post stroke led to a significant subgroup difference for standing balance (P < 0.001) in non-dose-matched therapy. In non-dose-matched therapy, different trunk therapy approaches had a significant effect on ADL (< 0.001), trunk function (P < 0.001) and standing balance (< 0.001). When participants received dose-matched therapy, analysis of subgroup differences showed that the trunk therapy approach had a significant effect on ADL (P = 0.001), trunk function (P < 0.001), arm-hand activity (P < 0.001), standing balance (P = 0.002), and leg function (P = 0.002). Also for dose-matched therapy, subgroup analysis for time post stroke resulted in a significant difference for the outcomes standing balance (P < 0.001), walking ability (P = 0.003) and leg function (P < 0.001), time post stroke significantly modified the effect of intervention.  Core-stability trunk (15 trials), selective-trunk (14 trials) and unstable-trunk (16 trials) training approaches were mostly applied in the included trials. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is evidence to suggest that trunk training as part of rehabilitation improves ADL, trunk function, standing balance, walking ability, upper and lower limb function, and quality of life in people after stroke. Core-stability, selective-, and unstable-trunk training were the trunk training approaches mostly applied in the included trials. When considering only trials with a low risk of bias, results were mostly confirmed, with very low to moderate certainty, depending on the outcome.

Longitudinal Synaptic Density PET with 11 C-UCB-J 6 Months After Ischemic Stroke.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to explore longitudinal changes in synaptic density after ischemic stroke in vivo with synaptic vesicle protein 2A (SV2A) positron emission tomography (PET). METHODS: We recruited patients with an ischemic stroke to undergo 11 C-UCB-J PET/MR within the first month and 6 months after the stroke. We investigated longitudinal changes of partial volume corrected 11 C-UCB-J standardized uptake value ratio (SUVR; relative to centrum semiovale) within the ischemic lesion, peri-ischemic area and unaffected ipsilesional and contralesional grey matter. We also explored crossed cerebellar diaschisis at 6 months. Additionally, we defined brain regions potentially influencing upper limb motor recovery after stroke and studied 11 C-UCB-J SUVR evolution in comparison to baseline. RESULTS: In 13 patients (age = 67 ± 15 years) we observed decreasing 11 C-UCB-J SUVR in the ischemic lesion (ΔSUVR = -1.0, p = 0.001) and peri-ischemic area (ΔSUVR = -0.31, p = 0.02) at 6 months after stroke compared to baseline. Crossed cerebellar diaschisis as measured with 11 C-UCB-J SUVR was present in 11 of 13 (85%) patients at 6 months. The 11 C-UCB-J SUVR did not augment in ipsilesional or contralesional brain regions associated with motor recovery. On the contrary, there was an overall trend of declining 11 C-UCB-J SUVR in these brain regions, reaching statistical significance only in the nonlesioned part of the ipsilesional supplementary motor area (ΔSUVR = -0.83, p = 0.046). INTERPRETATION: At 6 months after stroke, synaptic density further declined in the ischemic lesion and peri-ischemic area compared to baseline. Brain regions previously demonstrated to be associated with motor recovery after stroke did not show increases in synaptic density. ANN NEUROL 2023;93:911-921.

In Vivo Detection of Neurofibrillary Tangles by 18F-MK-6240 PET/MR in Patients With Ischemic Stroke.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The risk of developing Alzheimer disease is increased after stroke, and this association may not solely be driven by traditional vascular risk factors. Neuronal death leads to the release of tau proteins, which can become dephosphorylated, rephosphorylated, or hyperphosphorylated in the setting of ischemia, possibly leading to formation of neurofibrillary tangles (NFT). Therefore, a potential synergistic effect between development of tauopathy and cerebrovascular lesion burden may contribute to cognitive decline after stroke. We explored the spatial and temporal distribution of NFT after ischemic stroke in vivo by using 18F-MK-6240 PET. METHODS: We included patients with a first ischemic stroke to undergo longitudinal 18F-MK-6240 PET/MR within 2-4 weeks and 6 months after stroke. For cross-sectional analyses, we also included age-matched healthy controls. We delineated 5 volumes of interest based on T2 FLAIR and T1 MR data: the ischemic lesion, 3 consecutive peri-ischemic areas, and the remaining ipsilesional hemisphere. We performed region-based voxel-wise partial volume correction on the PET data and calculated standardized uptake value ratios (SUVRs) with the cerebellum as the reference region. RESULTS: We did not quantify PET scans of patients within the first month after stroke (n = 17; median age 73 years [interquartile range {IQR}: 62-82 years]) because the signal intensity was influenced by blood-brain barrier breakdown hampering a reliable data analysis. At 6 months after the event (n = 13; median age 71 years [IQR: 60-79 years]), 18F-MK-6240 SUVR was increased in the ischemic lesion compared with 20 age-matched healthy controls (median age 71.5 years [IQR: 66-76 years]; ratiolesion/controls = 1.62 ± 0.54; 1-sample t test: p = 0.0015) and gradually decreased in the surrounding tissue (1-way within-subject analysis of variance [F{1.2, 14.8} = 18.0, p = 0.00043]). DISCUSSION: These findings suggest that NFT may form after ischemic stroke and spread in the peri-ischemic brain parenchyma. Further follow-up is required to gain more insight into the spatial and temporal dynamics of this tauopathy after ischemic stroke.

Changes in synaptic density in the subacute phase after ischemic stroke: A 11C-UCB-J PET/MR study.

Functional alterations after ischemic stroke have been described with Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) and perfusion Positron Emission Tomography (PET), but no data on in vivo synaptic changes exist. Recently, imaging of synaptic density became available by targeting synaptic vesicle protein 2 A, a protein ubiquitously expressed in all presynaptic nerve terminals. We hypothesized that in subacute ischemic stroke loss of synaptic density can be evaluated with 11C-UCB-J PET in the ischemic tissue and that alterations in synaptic density can be present in brain regions beyond the ischemic core. We recruited ischemic stroke patients to undergo 11C-UCB-J PET/MR imaging 21 ± 8 days after stroke onset to investigate regional 11C-UCB-J SUVR (standardized uptake value ratio). There was a decrease (but residual signal) of 11C-UCB-J SUVR within the lesion of 16 stroke patients compared to 40 healthy controls (ratiolesion/controls = 0.67 ± 0.28, p = 0.00023). Moreover, 11C-UCB-J SUVR was lower in the non-lesioned tissue of the affected hemisphere compared to the unaffected hemisphere (ΔSUVR = -0.17, p = 0.0035). The contralesional cerebellar hemisphere showed a lower 11C-UCB-J SUVR compared to the ipsilesional cerebellar hemisphere (ΔSUVR = -0.14, p = 0.0048). In 8 out of 16 patients, the asymmetry index suggested crossed cerebellar diaschisis. Future research is required to longitudinally study these changes in synaptic density and their association with outcome.

Technology-supported sitting balance therapy versus usual care in the chronic stage after stroke: a pilot randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Technology development for sitting balance therapy and trunk rehabilitation is scarce. Hence, intensive one-to-one therapist-patient training is still required. We have developed a novel rehabilitation prototype, specifically aimed at providing sitting balance therapy. We investigated whether technology-supported sitting balance training was feasible and safe in chronic stroke patients and we determined whether clinical outcomes improved after a four-week programme, compared with usual care. METHODS: In this parallel-group, assessor-blinded, randomized controlled pilot trial, we divided first-event chronic stroke participants into two groups. The experimental group received usual care plus additional therapy supported by rehabilitation technology, consisting of 12 sessions of 50 min of therapy over four weeks. The control group received usual care only. We assessed all participants twice pre-intervention and once post-intervention. Feasibility and safety were descriptively analysed. Between-group analysis evaluated the pre-to-post differences in changes in motor and functional outcomes. RESULTS: In total, 30 participants were recruited and 29 completed the trial (experimental group: n = 14; control group: n = 15). There were no between-group differences at baseline. Therapy was evaluated as feasible by participants and therapist. There were no serious adverse events during sitting balance therapy. Changes in clinical outcomes from pre- to post-intervention demonstrated increases in the experimental than in the control group for: sitting balance and trunk function, evaluated by the Trunk Impairment Scale (mean points score (SD) 7.07 (1.69) versus 0.33 (2.35); p < 0.000); maximum gait speed, assessed with the 10 Metre Walk Test (mean gait speed 0.16 (0.16) m/s versus 0.06 (0.06) m/s; p = 0.003); and functional balance, measured using the Berg balance scale (median points score (IQR) 4.5 (5) versus 0 (4); p = 0.014). CONCLUSIONS: Technology-supported sitting balance training in persons with chronic stroke is feasible and safe. A four-week, 12-session programme on top of usual care suggests beneficial effects for trunk function, maximum gait speed and functional balance. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04467554, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04467554 , date of Registration: 13 July 2020.

Brain connectivity alterations after additional sensorimotor or motor therapy for the upper limb in the early-phase post stroke: a randomized controlled trial.

Somatosensory function plays an important role for upper limb motor learning. However, knowledge about underlying mechanisms of sensorimotor therapy is lacking. We aim to investigate differences in therapy-induced resting-state functional connectivity changes between additional sensorimotor compared with motor therapy in the early-phase post stroke. Thirty first-stroke patients with a sensorimotor impairment were included for an assessor-blinded multi-centre randomized controlled trial within 8 weeks post stroke [13 (43%) females; mean age: 67 ± 13 years; mean time post stroke: 43 ± 13 days]. Patients were randomly assigned to additional sensorimotor (n = 18) or motor (n = 12) therapy, receiving 16 h of additional therapy within 4 weeks. Sensorimotor evaluations and resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging were performed at baseline (T1), post-intervention (T2) and after 4 weeks follow-up (T3). Resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging was also performed in an age-matched healthy control group (n = 19) to identify patterns of aberrant connectivity in stroke patients between hemispheres, or within ipsilesional and contralesional hemispheres. Mixed model analysis investigated session and treatment effects between stroke therapy groups. Non-parametric partial correlations were used to investigate brain-behaviour associations with age and frame-wise displacement as nuisance regressors. Connections within the contralesional hemisphere that showed hypo-connectivity in subacute stroke patients (compared with healthy controls) showed a trend towards a more pronounced pre-to-post normalization (less hypo-connectivity) in the motor therapy group, compared with the sensorimotor therapy group (mean estimated difference = -0.155 ± 0.061; P = 0.02). Further, the motor therapy group also tended to show a further pre-to-post increase in functional connectivity strength among connections that already showed hyper-connectivity in the stroke patients at baseline versus healthy controls (mean estimated difference = -0.144 ± 0.072; P = 0.06). Notably, these observed increases in hyper-connectivity of the contralesional hemisphere were positively associated with improvements in functional activity (r = 0.48), providing indications that these patterns of hyper-connectivity are compensatory in nature. The sensorimotor and motor therapy group showed no significant differences in terms of pre-to-post changes in inter-hemispheric connectivity or ipsilesional intrahemispheric connectivity. While effects are only tentative within this preliminary sample, results suggest a possible stronger normalization of hypo-connectivity and a stronger pre-to-post increase in compensatory hyper-connectivity of the contralesional hemisphere after motor therapy compared with sensorimotor therapy. Future studies with larger patient samples are however recommended to confirm these trend-based preliminary findings.

Sensorimotor vs. Motor Upper Limb Therapy for Patients With Motor and Somatosensory Deficits: A Randomized Controlled Trial in the Early Rehabilitation Phase After Stroke.

Background: Somatosensory function plays an important role in motor learning. More than half of the stroke patients have somatosensory impairments in the upper limb, which could hamper recovery. Question: Is sensorimotor upper limb (UL) therapy of more benefit for motor and somatosensory outcome than motor therapy? Design: Randomized assessor- blinded multicenter controlled trial with block randomization stratified for neglect, severity of motor impairment, and type of stroke. Participants: 40 first-ever stroke patients with UL sensorimotor impairments admitted to the rehabilitation center. Intervention: Both groups received 16 h of additional therapy over 4 weeks consisting of sensorimotor (N = 22) or motor (N = 18) UL therapy. Outcome measures: Action Research Arm test (ARAT) as primary outcome, and other motor and somatosensory measures were assessed at baseline, post-intervention and after 4 weeks follow-up. Results: No significant between-group differences were found for change scores in ARAT or any somatosensory measure between the three time points. For UL impairment (Fugl-Meyer assessment), a significant greater improvement was found for the motor group compared to the sensorimotor group from baseline to post-intervention [mean (SD) improvement 14.65 (2.19) vs. 5.99 (2.06); p = 0.01] and from baseline to follow-up [17.38 (2.37) vs. 6.75 (2.29); p = 0.003]. Conclusion: UL motor therapy may improve motor impairment more than UL sensorimotor therapy in patients with sensorimotor impairments in the early rehabilitation phase post stroke. For these patients, integrated sensorimotor therapy may not improve somatosensory function and may be less effective for motor recovery. Clinical Trial Registration: www.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT03236376.

Effectiveness of somatosensory interventions on somatosensory, motor and functional outcomes in the upper limb post-stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Research mainly focuses on motor recovery of the upper limb after stroke. Less attention has been paid to somatosensory recovery. OBJECTIVE: To review and summarize the effect of upper limb somatosensory interventions on somatosensory impairment, motor impairment, functional activity and participation after stroke. METHODS: Biomedical databases Ovid Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science, PEDro, and OTseeker were searched with an update in May 2018. Randomized controlled trials investigating the effect of somatosensory-specific interventions focusing on exteroceptive, proprioceptive or higher cortical somatosensory dysfunction, or any combination were eligible for inclusion. Quality of included studies were assessed using Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale. Standardized Mean Differences and Mean Differences and 95% confidence intervals were calculated and combined in meta-analyses. RESULTS: Active somatosensory interventions did not show a significant effect on somatosensation and activity, but demonstrated a significant improvement in motor impairment (SMD = 0.73, 95% CI = 0.14 to 1.32). No study evaluating active somatosensory intervention included participation. Passive somatosensory interventions significantly improved light touch sensation (SMD = 1.13, 95% CI = 0.20 to 2.05). Passive somatosensory interventions did not show significant effects on proprioception and higher cortical somatosensation, motor impairment, activity and participation. CONCLUSIONS: To date, there is low quality evidence suggesting active somatosensory interventions having a beneficial effect on upper limb impairment and very low quality evidence suggesting passive somatosensory interventions improving upper limb light touch sensation. There is a need for further well-designed trials of somatosensory rehabilitation post stroke.

Do trunk exercises improve trunk and upper extremity performance, post stroke? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Post-stroke trunk control is reported to be associated with trunk performance and recovery of the upper limb, but the evidence for the influence of trunk exercise on both of these is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of trunk exercises on trunk performance post-stroke, and to determine if these exercises result in improved upper limb function. METHODS: A comprehensive search of the literature published between January 1990 and February 2017 was conducted using the following electronic databases; AMED, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsychInfo and SPORTDiscus. Only randomized, controlled trials, published in English, evaluating the effect of trunk exercises on trunk performance and/or upper limb function post-stroke, were included. RESULTS: A total of 17 studies involving 599 participants were analysed. Meta-analysis showed that trunk exercises had a large significant effect on trunk performance post-stroke. This effect varied from very large for acute stroke to medium for subacute and chronic stroke. None of the included studies had measured the effect of trunk exercise on upper limb impairment or functional activity. CONCLUSIONS: Trunk exercises improve trunk performance for people with acute, subacute and chronic strokes. As yet there is no evidence to support the effect of trunk exercise on upper limb function.

The Adult Assisting Hand Assessment Stroke: Psychometric Properties of an Observation-Based Bimanual Upper Limb Performance Measurement.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate interrater and intrarater reliability, measurement error, and convergent and discriminative validity of the Adult Assisting Hand Assessment Stroke (Ad-AHA Stroke). DESIGN: Cross-sectional observational study. SETTING: A total of 7 stroke rehabilitation centers. PARTICIPANTS: Stroke survivors (reliability sample: n=30; validity sample: N=118) were included (median age 67y; interquartile range [IQR], 59-76); median time poststroke 81 days (IQR 57-117). INTERVENTIONS: N/A. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Ad-AHA Stroke, Action Research Arm Test (ARAT), upper extremity Fugl-Meyer Assessment (UE-FMA). The Ad-AHA Stroke is an observation-based instrument assessing the effectiveness of the spontaneous use of the affected hand when performing bimanual activities in adults poststroke. Reliability of Ad-AHA Stroke was examined using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), Bland-Altman plots, and weighted kappa statistics for reliability on item level. SEM was calculated based on Ad-AHA units. Convergent validity was assessed by calculating Spearman rank correlation coefficients between Ad-AHA Stroke and ARA test and UE-FMA. Comparison of Ad-AHA Stroke scores between subgroups of patients according to hand dominance, neglect, and age evaluated discriminative validity. RESULTS: Intrarater and interrater agreement showed an ICC of 0.99 (95% confidence interval, 0.99-0.99), an SEM of 2.15 and 1.64 out of 100, respectively, and weighted kappa for item scores were all above 0.79. The relation between Ad-AHA and other clinical assessments was strong (ρ=0.9). Patients with neglect had significantly lower Ad-AHA scores compared to patients without neglect (P=.004). CONCLUSIONS: The Ad-AHA Stroke captures actual bimanual performance. Therefore, it provides an additional aspect of upper limb assessment with good to excellent reliability and low SEM for patients with subacute stroke. High convergent validity with the ARA test and UE-FMA and discriminative validity were supported.

Does sensorimotor upper limb therapy post stroke alter behavior and brain connectivity differently compared to motor therapy? Protocol of a phase II randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The role of somatosensory feedback in motor performance has been warranted in the literature. Although sensorimotor deficits are common after stroke, current rehabilitation approaches primarily focus on restoring upper limb motor ability. Evidence for integrative sensorimotor rehabilitation approaches is scarce, as is knowledge about neural correlates of somatosensory impairments after stroke and the effect of rehabilitation on brain connectivity level. Therefore, we aim to investigate changes in sensorimotor function and brain connectivity following a sensorimotor therapy program compared to an attention-matched motor therapy program for the upper limb after stroke. METHODS: An assessor-blinded randomized controlled trial will be conducted. Sixty inpatient rehabilitation patients up to eight weeks after stroke will be included. Patients will be randomized to either an experimental group receiving sensorimotor therapy or a control group receiving attention-matched motor therapy for the upper limb, with both groups receiving conventional therapy. Thus, all patients will receive extra therapy, a total of 16 1-h sessions over four weeks. Patients will be assessed at baseline, after four weeks of training, and after four weeks of follow-up. Primary outcome measure is the Action Research Arm Test. Secondary outcome measures will consist of somatosensory, motor and cognitive assessments, and a standardized resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging protocol. DISCUSSION: The integration of sensory and motor rehabilitation into one therapy model might provide the added value of this therapy to improve sensorimotor performance post stroke. Insight in the behavioral and brain connectivity changes post therapy will lead to a better understanding of working mechanisms of therapy and will provide new knowledge for patient-tailored therapy approaches. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03236376 . Registered on 8 August 2017.

Virtual Reality Training for Upper Extremity in Subacute Stroke (VIRTUES): A multicenter RCT.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of upper extremity virtual reality rehabilitation training (VR) to time-matched conventional training (CT) in the subacute phase after stroke. METHODS: In this randomized, controlled, single-blind phase III multicenter trial, 120 participants with upper extremity motor impairment within 12 weeks after stroke were consecutively included at 5 rehabilitation institutions. Participants were randomized to either VR or CT as an adjunct to standard rehabilitation and stratified according to mild to moderate or severe hand paresis, defined as ≥20 degrees wrist and 10 degrees finger extension or less, respectively. The training comprised a minimum of sixteen 60-minute sessions over 4 weeks. The primary outcome measure was the Action Research Arm Test (ARAT); secondary outcome measures were the Box and Blocks Test and Functional Independence Measure. Patients were assessed at baseline, after intervention, and at the 3-month follow-up. RESULTS: Mean time from stroke onset for the VR group was 35 (SD 21) days and for the CT group was 34 (SD 19) days. There were no between-group differences for any of the outcome measures. Improvement of upper extremity motor function assessed with ARAT was similar at the postintervention (p = 0.714) and follow-up (p = 0.777) assessments. Patients in VR improved 12 (SD 11) points from baseline to the postintervention assessment and 17 (SD 13) points from baseline to follow-up, while patients in CT improved 13 (SD 10) and 17 (SD 13) points, respectively. Improvement was also similar for our subgroup analysis with mild to moderate and severe upper extremity paresis. CONCLUSIONS: Additional upper extremity VR training was not superior but equally as effective as additional CT in the subacute phase after stroke. VR may constitute a motivating training alternative as a supplement to standard rehabilitation. CLINICALTRIALSGOV IDENTIFIER: NCT02079103. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class I evidence that for patients with upper extremity motor impairment after stroke, compared to conventional training, VR training did not lead to significant differences in upper extremity function improvement.

Is upper limb virtual reality training more intensive than conventional training for patients in the subacute phase after stroke? An analysis of treatment intensity and content.

BACKGROUND: Virtual reality (VR) training is thought to improve upper limb (UL) motor function after stroke when utilizing intensive training with many repetitions. The purpose of this study was to compare intensity and content of a VR training intervention to a conventional task-oriented intervention (CT). METHODS: A random sample of 50 video recordings was analyzed of patients with a broad range of UL motor impairments (mean age 61y, 22 women). Patients took part in the VIRTUES trial and were randomized to either VR or CT and stratified according to severity of paresis. A standardized scoring form was used to analyze intensity, i.e. active use of the affected UL expressed in % of total time, total active time and total duration of a training session in minutes, content of training and feedback. Two raters collected data independently. Linear regression models as well as descriptive and graphical methods were used. RESULTS: Patients in the VR group spent significantly more time actively practicing with an activity rate of 77.6 (8.9) % than patients in the CT 67.3 (13.9) %, (p = .003). This difference was attributed to the subgroup of patients with initially severe paresis (n = 22). While in VR severely impaired patients spent 80.7 % (4.4 %) of the session time actively; they reached 60.6 (12.1) % in CT. VR and CT also differed in terms of tasks and feedback provided. CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that patients with severely impaired UL motor function spent more time actively in VR training, which may influence recovery. The upcoming results of the VIRTUES trial will show whether this is correlated with an increased effect of VR compared to CT. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02079103 , February 27, 2014.

Somatosensory Impairments in the Upper Limb Poststroke: Distribution and Association With Motor Function and Visuospatial Neglect.

BACKGROUND: A thorough understanding of the presence of different upper-limb somatosensory deficits poststroke and the relation with motor performance remains unclear. Additionally, knowledge about the relation between somatosensory deficits and visuospatial neglect is limited. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the distribution of upper-limb somatosensory impairments and the association with unimanual and bimanual motor outcomes and visuospatial neglect. METHODS: A cross-sectional observational study was conducted, including 122 patients within 6 months after stroke (median = 82 days; interquartile range = 57-133 days). Somatosensory measurement included the Erasmus MC modification of the (revised) Nottingham Sensory Assessment (Em-NSA), Perceptual Threshold of Touch (PTT), thumb finding test, 2-point discrimination, and stereognosis subscale of the NSA. Upper-limb motor assessment comprised the Fugl-Meyer assessment, motricity index, Action Research Arm Test, and Adult-Assisting Hand Assessment Stroke. Screening for visuospatial neglect was performed using the Star Cancellation Test. RESULTS: Upper-limb somatosensory impairments were common, with prevalence rates ranging from 21% to 54%. Low to moderate Spearman ρ correlations were found between somatosensory and motor deficits (r = 0.22-0.61), with the strongest associations for PTT (r = 0.56-0.61) and stereognosis (r = 0.51-0.60). Visuospatial neglect was present in 27 patients (22%). Between-group analysis revealed somatosensory deficits that occurred significantly more often and more severely in patients with visuospatial neglect (P < .05). Results showed consistently stronger correlations between motor and somatosensory deficits in patients with visuospatial neglect (r = 0.44-0.78) compared with patients without neglect (r = 0.08-0.59). CONCLUSIONS: Somatosensory impairments are common in subacute patients poststroke and are related to motor outcome. Visuospatial neglect was associated with more severe upper-limb somatosensory impairments.