Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||Functional versus nonfunctional rehabilitation in chronic ischemic stroke: evidences from a randomized functional mri study|
|Authors:||Pelicioni, Maristela C. X.|
Novaes, Morgana M.
Peres, Andre S. C.
Souza, Altay Alves Lino de [UNIFESP]
Fabio, Soraia R. C.
Pontes-Neto, Octavio M.
Santos, Antonio C.
de Araujo, Draulio B.
|Keywords:||Induced Movement Therapy|
Motor Cortex Activation
|Citation:||Neural Plasticity. London, 2016.|
|Abstract:||Motor rehabilitation of stroke survivors may include functional and/or nonfunctional strategy. The present study aimed to compare the effect of these two rehabilitation strategies by means of clinical scales and functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI). Twelve hemiparetic chronic stroke patients were selected. Patients were randomly assigned a nonfunctional (NFS) or functional (FS) rehabilitation scheme. Clinical scales (Fugl-Meyer, ARA test, and modified Barthel) and fMRI were applied at four moments: before rehabilitation (P1) and immediately after (P2), 1 month after (P3), and three months after (P4) the end of rehabilitation. The NFS group improved significantly and exclusively their Fugl-Meyer scores at P2, P3, and P4, when compared to P1. On the other hand, the FS group increased significantly in Fugl-Meyer at P2, when compared to P1, and also in their ARA and Barthel scores. fMRI inspection at the individual level revealed that both rehabilitation schemes most often led to decreased activation sparseness, decreased activity of contralesional M1, increased asymmetry of M1 activity to the ipsilesional side, decreased perilesional activity, and decreased SMA activity. Increased M1 asymmetry with rehabilitation was also confirmed by Lateralization Indexes. Our clinical analysis revealed subtle differences between FS and NFS.|
|Appears in Collections:||Artigo|
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.