Generalizability of the Maximum Proportional Recovery Rule to Visuospatial Neglect Early Poststroke

Two short tests of motor function, the Motricity Index (MI) and the Trunk Control Test (TCT), were assessed at regular intervals after stroke and compared with a detailed physiotherapy test, the Rivermead Motor Assessment (RMA). The MI and TCT were valid and reliable tests which were usually quicker to perform than the RMA. The TCT was of predictive value when related to eventual walking ability. All three tests appeared to be of equal sensitivity in detecting change.

Longitudinal conducted studies show that neurologic and functional recovery show faster recovery in the first weeks poststroke. The aim of the present study was to study the effects of progress of time on observed improvements in motor strength, synergisms, and activities during the first 16 weeks poststroke. Based on data from a previous study, 101 patients with first-ever ischemic middle cerebral artery strokes were prospectively investigated during the first 16 weeks after stroke. Progress of time was categorized into 8 biweekly time intervals and was used as the independent covariate in a first-order longitudinal regression model. The biweekly time change (progress of time) was related to improvement in upper and lower limb motor recovery assessed with Fugl-Meyer score and Motricity Index, reduction in visuospatial inattention based on the letter cancellation task, and improvement in walking ability, dexterity, and activities of daily living measured with the Functional Ambulation Categories, Action Research Arm test, and Barthel Index. Time explained a significant change of 8.4 (42%) measurement units on the Barthel Index for the first 10 weeks poststroke, 1.1 (22%) measurement units on Functional Ambulation Categories, and 19% on the Action Research Arm test for the first 6 and 8 weeks poststroke. Approximately 25% (for Fugl-Meyer-arm) to 26% (for Motricity Index-arm) of the significant change in measurements units was explained by time alone for the upper limb compared with 33% for Fugl-Meyer-leg and 39% for Motricity Index-leg of the lower limb. Time accounted for a reduction of 16% in the letter cancellation task. Observed associations did not change after controlling for covariates such as age, gender, hemisphere of stroke, type of stroke, or intervention. Progress of time is an independent covariate that reflects spontaneous recovery of body functions and activities explaining &16% to 42% of the observed improvements in the first 6 to 10 weeks after stroke onset.

We investigated the effects of different intensities of arm and leg rehabilitation training on the functional recovery of activities of daily living (ADL), walking ability, and dexterity of the paretic arm, in a single-blind randomised controlled trial. Within 14 days after stroke onset, 101 severely disabled patients with a primary middle-cerebral-artery stroke were randomly assigned to: a rehabilitation programme with emphasis on arm training; a rehabilitation programme with emphasis on leg training; or a control programme in which the arm and leg were immobilised with an inflatable pressure splint. Each treatment regimen was applied for 30 min, 5 days a week during the first 20 weeks after stroke. In addition, all patients underwent a basic rehabilitation programme. The main outcome measures were ability in ADL (Barthel index), walking ability (functional ambulation categories), and dexterity of the paretic arm (Action Research arm test) at 6, 12, 20, and 26 weeks. Analyses were by intention to treat. At week 20, the leg-training group (n=31) had higher scores than the control group (n=37) for ADL ability (median 19 [IQR 16-20] vs 16 [10-19], p<0.05), walking ability (4 [3-5] vs 3 [1-4], p<0.05), and dexterity (2 [0-56] vs 0 [0-2], p<0.01). The arm-training group (n=33) differed significantly from the control group only in dexterity (9 [0-39] vs 0 [0-2], p<0.01). There were no significant differences in these endpoints at 20 weeks between the arm-training and leg-training groups. Greater intensity of leg rehabilitation improves functional recovery and health-related functional status, whereas greater intensity of arm rehabilitation results in small improvements in dexterity, providing further evidence that exercise therapy primarily induces treatment effects on the abilities at which training is specifically aimed.