You are not logged in. Press here to login.

Content

List volumes - List articles in this issue

Review article

Unilateral versus bilateral upper limb exercise therapy after stroke: A systematic review

doi: 10.2340/16501977-0928

Open access

Abstract:

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of unilateral and bilateral training on upper limb function after stroke with regard to two key factors: severity of upper limb paresis and time of intervention post-stroke.
DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
METHODS: Two authors independently selected trials for inclusion, assessed the methodological quality and extracted data. Study outcomes were pooled by calculating the (standardized) mean difference ((S)MD). Sensitivity analyses for severity and time of intervention post-stroke were applied when possible.
RESULTS: All 9 studies involving 452 patients showed homogeneity. In chronic patients with a mild upper limb paresis after stroke a marginally significant SMD for upper limb activity performance (SMD 0.34; 95% confidence interval): 0.04–0.63), and marginally significant MDs for perceived upper limb activity performance (amount of use: MD 0.42; 95% confidence interval: 0.09–0.76, and quality of movement: MD 0.45; 95% confidence interval: 0.12–0.78) were found in favour of unilateral training. All other MDs and SMDs were non-significant.
CONCLUSION: Unilateral and bilateral training are similarly effective. However, intervention success may depend on severity of upper limb paresis and time of intervention post-stroke.

Authors:

A E.Q van Delden , C.E. Peper, Peter J. Beek, Gert Kwakkel

References

  1. Mackay J, Mensah GA. The atlas of heart disease and stroke. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2004.
  2. Mathers C, Boerma T, Ma Fat D. The global burden of disease: 2004 update. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2006.
  3. Kwakkel G, Kollen BJ, van der Grond J, Prevo AJ. Probability of regaining dexterity in the flaccid upper limb: impact of severity of paresis and time since onset in acute stroke. Stroke 2003; 34: 2181–2186.
  4. Kwakkel G, Kollen B, Twisk J. Impact of time on improvement of outcome after stroke. Stroke 2006; 37: 2348–2353.
  5. Langhorne P, Coupar F, Pollock A. Motor recovery after stroke: a systematic review. Lancet Neurol 2009; 8: 741–754.
  6. Wolf SL, Winstein CJ, Miller JP, Taub E, Uswatte G, Morris D, et al. Effect of constraint-induced movement therapy on upper extremity function 3 to 9 months after stroke: the EXCITE randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2006; 296: 2095–2104.
  7. Whitall J, McCombe Waller S, Silver KH, Macko RF. Repetitive bilateral arm training with rhythmic auditory cueing improves motor function in chronic hemiparetic stroke. Stroke 2000; 31: 2390–2395.
  8. Taub E, Miller NE, Novack TA, Cook EW 3rd, Fleming WC, Nepomuceno CS, et al. Technique to improve chronic motor deficit after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1993; 74: 347–354.
  9. Taub E, Uswatte G, Pidikiti R. Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy: a new family of techniques with broad application to physical rehabilitation – a clinical review. J Rehabil Res Dev 1999; 36: 237–251.
  10. Morris DM, Taub E, Mark VW. Constraint-induced movement therapy: characterizing the intervention protocol. Eura Medicophys 2006; 42: 257–268.
  11. Van Peppen RP, Kwakkel G, Wood-Dauphinee S, Hendriks HJ, Van der Wees PJ, Dekker J. The impact of physical therapy on functional outcomes after stroke: what’s the evidence? Clin Rehabil 2004; 18: 833–862.
  12. Bjorklund A, Fecht A. The effectiveness of constraint-induced therapy as a stroke intervention: a meta-analysis. Occupat Ther Health Care 2006; 20: 31–49.
  13. Hakkennes S, Keating JL. Constraint-induced movement therapy following stroke: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials. Aust J Physiother 2005; 51: 221–231.
  14. Sirtori V, Corbetta D, Moja L, Gatti R. Constraint-induced movement therapy for upper extremities in stroke patients. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009: CD004433.
  15. Bonaiuti D, Rebasti L, Sioli P. The constraint induced movement therapy: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials on the adult stroke patients. Eura Medicophys 2007; 43: 139–146.
  16. van der Lee JH. Constraint-induced movement therapy: some thoughts about theories and evidence. J Rehabil Med 2003; 35: 41–45.
  17. van der Lee JH. Constraint-induced therapy for stroke: more of the same or something completely different? Curr Opin Neurol 2001; 14: 741–744.
  18. Mudie MH, Matyas TA. Can simultaneous bilateral movement involve the undamaged hemisphere in reconstruction of neural networks damaged by stroke? Disabil Rehabil 2000; 22: 23–37.
  19. Mudie MH, Matyas TA. Upper extremity retraining following stroke: effects of bilateral practice. J Neurol Rehabil 1996; 10: 167–184.
  20. Cohen L. Synchronous bimanual movements performed by homologous and non-homologous muscles. Percept Motor Skill 1971; 32: 639–644.
  21. Kelso JAS. Phase-transitions and critical-behavior in human bimanual coordination. Am J Physiol 1984; 246: 1000–1004.
  22. Kelso JAS, Southard DL, Goodman D. Coordination of 2-handed movements. J Exp Psychol Human 1979; 5: 229–238.
  23. Ridderikhoff A, Peper CE, Beek PJ. Unraveling interlimb interactions underlying bimanual coordination. J Neurophysiol 2005; 94: 3112–3125.
  24. Swinnen SP. Intermanual coordination: From behavioural principles to neural-network interactions. Nat Rev Neurosci 2002; 3: 350–361.
  25. Cauraugh JH, Summers JJ. Neural plasticity and bilateral movements: a rehabilitation approach for chronic stroke. Prog Neurobiol 2005; 75: 309–320.
  26. Goble DJ. The potential for utilizing inter-limb coupling in the rehabilitation of upper limb motor disability due to unilateral brain injury. Disabil Rehabil 2006; 28: 1103–1108.
  27. Carson RG. Neural pathways mediating bilateral interactions between the upper limbs. Brain Res Rev 2005; 49: 641–662.
  28. Cauraugh JH, Lodha N, Naik SK, Summers JJ. Bilateral movement training and stroke motor recovery progress: a structured review and meta-analysis. Hum Mov Sci 2010; 29: 853–870.
  29. Coupar F, Pollock A, van Wijck F, Morris J, Langhorne P. Simultaneous bilateral training for improving arm function after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010: CD006432.
  30. Latimer CP, Keeling J, Lin B, Henderson M, Hale LA. The impact of bilateral therapy on upper limb function after chronic stroke: a systematic review. Disabil Rehabil 2010; 32: 1221–1231.
  31. Stewart KC, Cauraugh JH, Summers JJ. Bilateral movement training and stroke rehabilitation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Neurol Sci 2006; 244: 89–95.
  32. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). World Health Organization. Geneva: Switzerland; 2011 [cited 2011 March 23]. Available from: http://www.who.int/classifications/icf/en/index.html.
  33. Cauraugh JH, Lodha N, Naik SK, Summers JJ. Commentary reply to Pollock et al. Meta-analysis issues on bilateral movement training and stroke motor recovery progress. Hum Mov Sci 2011; 30: 147–149.
  34. Pollock A, Morris J, Wijck F, Coupar F, Langhorne P. Response to Cauraugh, JH, et al. Bilateral movement training and stroke motor recovery progress: a structured review and meta-analysis. Human Movement Science (2009), doi: 10.1016/j.humov.2009.09.004. Hum Mov Sci 2011; 30: 143–146.
  35. Whitall J, Waller SM, Sorkin JD, Forrester LW, Macko RF, Hanley DF, et al. Bilateral and unilateral arm training improve motor function through differing neuroplastic mechanisms: a single-blinded randomized controlled trial. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2011; 25: 118–129.
  36. Dong Y, Dobkin BH, Cen SY, Wu AD, Winstein CJ. Motor cortex activation during treatment may predict therapeutic gains in paretic hand function after stroke. Stroke 2006; 37: 1552–1555.
  37. Hamzei F, Liepert J, Dettmers C, Weiller C, Rijntjes M. Two different reorganization patterns after rehabilitative therapy: an exploratory study with fMRI and TMS. Neuroimage 2006; 31: 710–720.
  38. Johansen-Berg H, Dawes H, Guy C, Smith SM, Wade DT, Matthews PM. Correlation between motor improvements and altered fMRI activity after rehabilitative therapy. Brain 2002; 125: 2731–2742.
  39. Liepert J, Bauder H, Wolfgang HR, Miltner WH, Taub E, Weiller C. Treatment-induced cortical reorganization after stroke in humans. Stroke 2000; 31: 1210–1216.
  40. Luft AR, McCombe-Waller S, Whitall J, Forrester LW, Macko R, Sorkin JD, et al. Repetitive bilateral arm training and motor cortex activation in chronic stroke: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2004; 292: 1853–1861.
  41. Sawaki L, Butler AJ, Leng X, Wassenaar PA, Mohammad YM, Blanton S, et al. Constraint-induced movement therapy results in increased motor map area in subjects 3 to 9 months after stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2008; 22: 505–513.
  42. Summers JJ, Kagerer FA, Garry MI, Hiraga CY, Loftus A, Cauraugh JH. Bilateral and unilateral movement training on upper limb function in chronic stroke patients: a TMS study. J Neurol Sci 2007; 252: 76–82.
  43. Wittenberg GF, Chen R, Ishii K, Bushara KO, Eckloff S, Croarkin E, et al. Constraint-induced therapy in stroke: magnetic-stimulation motor maps and cerebral activation. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2003; 17: 48–57.
  44. Wittenberg GF, Schaechter JD. The neural basis of constraint-induced movement therapy. Curr Opin Neurol 2009; 22: 582–588.
  45. Wu CY, Chuang LL, Lin KC, Chen HC, Tsay PK. Randomized trial of distributed constraint-induced therapy vs bilateral arm training for the rehabilitation of upper-limb motor control and function after stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2011; 25: 130–139.
  46. Caimmi M, Carda S, Giovanzana C, Maini ES, Sabatini AM, Smania N, et al. Using kinematic analysis to evaluate constraint-induced movement therapy in chronic stroke patients. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2008; 22: 31–39.
  47. Wu CY, Chen CL, Tsai WC, Lin KC, Chou SH. A randomized controlled trial of modified constraint-induced movement therapy for elderly stroke survivors: changes in motor impairment, daily functioning, and quality of life. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2007; 88: 273–278.
  48. Kwakkel G, Kollen B. Predicting improvement in the upper paretic limb after stroke: a longitudinal prospective study. Restor Neurol Neurosci 2007; 25: 453–460.
  49. Nijland RH, van Wegen EE, Harmeling-van der Wel BC, Kwakkel G. Presence of finger extension and shoulder abduction within 72 hours after stroke predicts functional recovery: early prediction of functional outcome after stroke: the EPOS cohort study. Stroke 2010; 41: 745–750.
  50. Taub E, Crago JE, Uswatte G. Constraint-induced movement therapy: a new approach to treatment in physical rehabilitation. Rehabil Psychol 1998; 43: 152–170.
  51. Stoykov ME, Corcos DM. A review of bilateral training for upper extremity hemiparesis. Occup Ther Int 2009; 16: 190–203.
  52. Bonifer NM, Anderson KM, Arciniegas DB. Constraint-induced movement therapy after stroke: Efficacy for patients with minimal upper-extremity motor ability. Arch Phys Med Rehab 2005; 86: 1867–1873.
  53. Blanton S, Wilsey H, Wolf SL. Constraint-induced movement therapy in stroke rehabilitation: Perspectives on future clinical applications. Neurorehabilitation 2008; 23: 15–28.
  54. Fritz SL, Light KE, Patterson TS, Behrman AL, Davis SB. Active finger extension predicts outcomes after constraint-induced movement therapy for individuals with hemiparesis after stroke. Stroke 2005; 36: 1172–1177.
  55. Rijntjes M, Hobbeling V, Hamzei F, Dohse S, Ketels G, Liepert J, et al. Individual factors in constraint-induced movement therapy after stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2005; 19: 238–249.
  56. Lang CE, Schieber MH. Reduced muscle selectivity during individuated finger movements in humans after damage to the motor cortex or corticospinal tract. J Neurophysiol 2004; 91: 1722–1733.
  57. Newton JM, Ward NS, Parker GJM, Deichmann R, Alexander DC, Friston KJ, et al. Non-invasive mapping of corticofugal fibres from multiple motor areas – relevance to stroke recovery. Brain 2006; 129: 1844–1858.
  58. Ward NS, Brown MM, Thompson AJ, Frackowiak RSJ. Neural correlates of outcome after stroke: a cross-sectional fMRI study. Brain 2003; 126: 1430–1448.
  59. Ward NS, Newton JM, Swayne OBC, Lee L, Thompson AJ, Greenwood RJ, et al. Motor system activation after subcortical stroke depends on corticospinal system integrity. Brain 2006; 129: 809–819.
  60. Stinear CM, Barber PA, Smale PR, Coxon JP, Fleming MK, Byblow WD. Functional potential in chronic stroke patients depends on corticospinal tract integrity. Brain 2007; 130: 170–180.
  61. Waller SM, Whitall J. Bilateral arm training: why and who benefits? Neurorehabilitation 2008; 23: 29–41.
  62. Wolf SL, Lecraw DE, Barton LA, Jann BB. Forced use of hemiplegic upper extremities to reverse the effect of learned nonuse among chronic stroke and head-injured patients. Exp Neurol 1989; 104: 125–132.
  63. Dromerick AW, Edwards DF, Hahn M. Does the application of constraint-induced movement therapy during acute rehabilitation reduce arm impairment after ischemic stroke? Stroke 2000; 31: 2984–2988.
  64. Dromerick AW, Lang CE, Birkenmeier RL, Wagner JM, Miller JP, Videen TO, et al. Very Early Constraint-Induced Movement during Stroke Rehabilitation (VECTORS): a single-center RCT. Neurology 2009; 73: 195–201.
  65. Page SJ, Levine P, Leonard AC. Modified constraint-induced therapy in acute stroke: a randomized controlled pilot study. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2005; 19: 27–32.
  66. Nijland RH, Kwakkel G, Bakers J, van Wegen E. Constraint induced movement therapy for the upper paretic limb in acute or subacute stroke: a systematic review. Int J Stroke 2011; 6: 425–433
  67. Morris JH, van Wijck F, Joice S, Ogston SA, Cole I, MacWalter RS. A comparison of bilateral and unilateral upper-limb task training in early poststroke rehabilitation: A randomized controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehab 2008; 89: 1237–1245.
  68. World Health Organization. Stroke – 1989. Recommendations on stroke prevention, diagnosis, and therapy. Report of the WHO Task Force on Stroke and other Cerebrovascular disorders. Stroke 1989; 20: 1407–1431.
  69. Oujamaa L, Relave I, Froger J, Mottet D, Pelissier JY. Rehabilitation of arm function after stroke. Literature review. Ann Phys Rehabil Med 2009; 52: 269–293.
  70. Maher CG, Sherrington C, Herbert RD, Moseley AM, Elkins M. Reliability of the PEDro scale for rating quality of randomized controlled trials. Phys Ther 2003; 83: 713–721.
  71. Sherrington C, Herbert RD, Maher CG, Moseley AM. PEDro. A database of randomized trials and systematic reviews in physiotherapy. Man Ther 2000; 5: 223–226.
  72. Higgins JPT, Green S, editors. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.0.2. The Cochrane Collaboration; 2008 [updated 2009 September]. Available from: http://www.cochrane-handbook.org.
  73. Globas C, Lam JM, Zhang W, Imanbayev A, Hertler B, Becker C, et al. Mesencephalic corticospinal atrophy predicts baseline deficit but not response to unilateral or bilateral arm training in chronic stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2011; 25: 81–87.
  74. McCombe Waller S, Liu W, Whitall J. Temporal and spatial control following bilateral versus unilateral training. Hum Mov Sci 2008; 27: 749–758.
  75. Wu CY, Hsieh YW, Lin KC, Chuang LL, Chang YF, Liu HL, et al. Brain reorganization after bilateral arm training and distributed constraint-induced therapy in stroke patients: a preliminary functional magnetic resonance imaging study. Chang Gung Med J 2010; 33: 628–638.
  76. Lin KC, Chen YA, Chen CL, Wu CY, Chang YF. The effects of bilateral arm training on motor control and functional performance in chronic stroke: a randomized controlled study. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2010; 24: 42–51.
  77. Rosa M, Vasconcelos O, Marques A. The influence of two rehabilitation protocols in upper-limb function of stroke patients. Int J Ther Rehabil 2010; 17: 464–470.
  78. Lin KC, Chang YF, Wu CY, Chen YA. Effects of constraint-induced therapy versus bilateral arm training on motor performance, daily functions, and quality of life in stroke survivors. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2009; 23: 441–448.
  79. Hayner K, Gibson G, Giles GM. Comparison of constraint-induced movement therapy and bilateral treatment of equal intensity in people with chronic upper-extremity dysfunction after cerebrovascular accident. Am J Occup Ther 2010; 64: 528–539.
  80. Stoykov ME, Lewis GN, Corcos DM. Comparison of bilateral and unilateral training for upper extremity hemiparesis in stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2009; 23: 945–953.
  81. Suputtitada A, Suwanwela NC, Tumvitee S. Effectiveness of constraint-induced movement therapy in chronic stroke patients. J Med Assoc Thai 2004; 87: 1482–1490.
  82. van der Lee JH, Wagenaar RC, Lankhorst GJ, Vogelaar TW, Deville WL, Bouter LM. Forced use of the upper extremity in chronic stroke patients – results from a single-blind randomized clinical trial. Stroke 1999; 30: 2369–2375.
  83. Davies PM. Steps to follow: a guide to the treatment of adult hemiplegia. Berlin: Springer Verlag; 1985.
  84. Ferraro M, Demaio JH, Krol J, Trudell C, Rannekleiv K, Edelstein L, et al. Assessing the motor status score: a scale for the evaluation of upper limb motor outcomes in patients after stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2002; 16: 283–289.
  85. Nijland R, van Wegen E, Verbunt J, van Wijk R, van Kordelaar J, Kwakkel G. A comparison of two validated tests for upper limb function after stroke: the Wolf Motor Function Test and the Action Research Arm Test. J Rehabil Med 2010; 42: 694–696.
  86. Ioannidis JPA, Trikalinos TA. The appropriateness of asymmetry tests for publication bias in meta-analyses: a large survey. Can Med Assoc J 2007; 176: 1091–1096.
  87. Fritz SL, Blanton S, Uswatte G, Taub E, Wolf SL. Minimal detectable change scores for the Wolf Motor Function Test. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2009; 23: 662–667.
  88. Lang CE, Edwards DF, Birkenmeier RL, Dromerick AW. Estimating minimal clinically important differences of upper-extremity measures early after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2008; 89: 1693–1700.
  89. Lin KC, Hsieh YW, Wu CY, Chen CL, Jang Y, Liu JS. Minimal detectable change and clinically important difference of the Wolf Motor Function Test in stroke patients. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2009; 23: 429–434.
  90. Van der Lee JH, De Groot V, Beckerman H, Wagenaar RC, Lankhorst GJ, Bouter LM. The intra- and interrater reliability of the action research arm test: a practical test of upper extremity function in patients with stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2001; 82: 14–19.
  91. Siegert RJ, Lord S, Porter K. Constraint-induced movement therapy: time for a little restraint? Clin Rehabil 2004; 18: 110–114.
  92. Uswatte G, Taub E, Morris D, Barman J, Crago J. Contribution of the shaping and restraint components of constraint-induced movement therapy to treatment outcome. Neurorehabilitation 2006; 21: 147–156.
  93. Kollen BJ, Lennon S, Lyons B, Wheatley-Smith L, Scheper M, Buurke JH, et al. The Effectiveness of the Bobath concept in stroke rehabilitation: what is the evidence? Stroke 2009; 40: E89–E97.


Related articles

There are no related articles.


Actions


Abstract

Full text

PDF

Supplementary


There is no supplementary for this article.

Related articles


Click here to show related articles

Print information


Volume 44, Issue 2

DOI: 10.2340/16501977-0928

Pages: 106-117

View at PubMed