Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T00:32:45.810Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 25 - Neurorehabilitation Practice for Stroke Patients

from Section 4 - Therapeutic Strategies and Neurorehabilitation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 May 2019

By
Jan Mehrholz
Edited by
Michael Brainin  and
Wolf-Dieter Heiss
Michael Brainin
Affiliation:
Donau-Universität Krems, Austria
Wolf-Dieter Heiss
Affiliation:
Universität zu Köln
Get access
Type
Chapter
Information
Textbook of Stroke Medicine , pp. 426 - 448
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Feigin, VL, Abajobir, AA, Abate, KH, et al. Global, regional, and national burden of neurological disorders during 1990–2015: a systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study 2015. Lancet Neurol 2017; 16: 877–97.Google Scholar
World Health Organization. WHO Global Disability Action Plan 2014–2021: Better Health for All People with Disability. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2014.Google Scholar
Langhorne, P, Sandercock, P, Prasad, K. Evidence-based practice for stroke. Lancet Neurol 2009; 8: 308–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Langhorne, P, Bernhardt, J, Kwakkel, G. Stroke rehabilitation. Lancet 2011; 377: 1693–702.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bernhardt, J, Thuy, MN, Collier, JM, Legg, LA. Very early versus delayed mobilisation after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009; 1: CD006187.Google Scholar
Bernhardt, J, The AVERT Trial Collaboration group. Efficacy and safety of very early mobilisation within 24 h of stroke onset (AVERT): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2015; 386: 46–55.Google Scholar
Bernhardt, J, Churilov, L, Ellery, F, et al. Prespecified dose-response analysis for a very early rehabilitation trial (AVERT). Neurology 2016; 86: 2138–45.Google Scholar
Bernhardt, J, Hayward, KS, Kwakkel, G, et al. Agreed definitions and a shared vision for new standards in stroke recovery research: the Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Roundtable Taskforce. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2017; 31: 793–9.Google Scholar
Schiemanck, SK, Kwakkel, G, Post, MW, Prevo, AJ. Predictive value of ischemic lesion volume assessed with magnetic resonance imaging for neurological deficits and functional outcome poststroke: a critical review of the literature. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2006; 20: 492–502.Google Scholar
Schiemanck, SK, Kwakkel, G, Post, MW, Kappelle, LJ, Prevo, AJ. Predicting long-term independency in activities of daily living after middle cerebral artery stroke: does information from MRI have added predictive value compared with clinical information? Stroke 2006; 37: 1050–4.Google Scholar
Veerbeek, JM, van Wegen, EE, Harmeling-van der Wel, BC, Kwakkel, G, Investigators, E. Is accurate prediction of gait in nonambulatory stroke patients possible within 72 hours poststroke? The EPOS Study. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2011; 25: 268–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nijland, RH, van Wegen, EE, Harmeling-van der Wel, BC, Kwakkel, G, EPOS Investigators. 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: 745–50.Google Scholar
Scrutinio, D, Lanzillo, B, Guida, P, et al. Development and validation of a predictive model for functional outcome after stroke rehabilitation. The Maugeri Model. Stroke 2017; 48: 3308–15.Google Scholar
Breitenstein, C, Grewe, T, Floel, A, et al. Intensive speech and language therapy in patients with chronic aphasia after stroke: a randomised, open-label, blinded-endpoint, controlled trial in a health-care setting. Lancet 2017; 389: 1528–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Charidimou, A, Kasselimis, D, Varkanitsa, M, et al. Why is it difficult to predict language impairment and outcome in patients with aphasia after stroke? J Clin Neurol 2014; 10: 75–83.Google Scholar
Terre, R, Mearin, F. Resolution of tracheal aspiration after the acute phase of stroke-related oropharyngeal dysphagia. Am J Gastroenterol 2009; 104: 923–32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mann, G, Hankey, GJ, Cameron, D. Swallowing function after stroke: prognosis and prognostic factors at 6 months. Stroke 1999; 30: 744–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Winstein, CJ, Stein, J, Arena, R, et al. Guidelines for adult stroke rehabilitation and recovery: a guideline for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke 2016; 47: e98–169.Google Scholar
Carr, J, Shephard, R. Optimizing functional motor recovery after stroke. In: Mehrholz, J, ed. Physical Therapy for the Stroke Patient: Early Stage Rehabilitation. Stuttgart: Thieme; 2012: 51–133.Google Scholar
Carr, J, Shepherd, R. Stroke Rehabilitation: Guidelines for Exercises and Training. London: Butterworth Heinemann; 2003.Google Scholar
Wulf, G, Lewthwaite, R. Optimizing performance through intrinsic motivation and attention for learning: the OPTIMAL theory of motor learning. Psychon Bull Rev 2016; 23: 1382–414.Google Scholar
Wolf, SL, Kwakkel, G, Bayley, M, McDonnell, MN. Best practice for arm recovery post stroke: an international application. Physiotherapy 2016; 102: 1–4.Google Scholar
Reinkensmeyer, DJ, Burdet, E, Casadio, M, et al. Computational neurorehabilitation: modeling plasticity and learning to predict recovery. J Neuroeng Rehabil 2016; 13: 1–25.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Askim, T, Indredavik, B, Vangberg, T, Haberg, A. Motor network changes associated with successful motor skill relearning after acute ischemic stroke: a longitudinal functional magnetic resonance imaging study. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2009; 23: 295–304.Google Scholar
Nudo, RJ. Mechanisms for recovery of motor function following cortical damage. Curr Opin Neurobiol 2006; 16: 638–44.Google Scholar
Winstein, CJ, Kay, DB. Translating the science into practice: shaping rehabilitation practice to enhance recovery after brain damage. Prog Brain Res 2015; 218: 331–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wulf, G, Shea, C, Lewthwaite, R. Motor skill learning and performance: a review of influential factors. Med Educ 2010; 44: 75–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schmidt, R, Lee, T. Motor Control and Learning – a Behavioral Emphasis. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics; 2011.Google Scholar
Schmidt, R, Lee, T. Motor Learning and Control. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics; 2005.Google Scholar
Veerbeek, JM, van Wegen, E, van Peppen, R, et al. What is the evidence for physical therapy poststroke? A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 2014; 9: e87987.Google Scholar
Lohse, KR, Lang, CE, Boyd, LA. Is more better? Using metadata to explore dose-response relationships in stroke rehabilitation. Stroke 2014; 45: 2053–8.Google Scholar
Kwakkel, G, van Peppen, R, Wagenaar, RC, et al. Effects of augmented exercise therapy time after stroke: a meta-analysis. Stroke 2004; 35: 2529–39.Google Scholar
ATTEND Collaborative Group. Family-led rehabilitation after stroke in India (ATTEND): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2017; 390: 588–99.Google Scholar
Winstein, CJ, Wolf, SL, Dromerick, AW, et al. Effect of a task-oriented rehabilitation program on upper extremity recovery following motor stroke: the ICARE randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2016; 315: 571–81.Google Scholar
Saposnik, G, Cohen, LG, Mamdani, M, et al. Efficacy and safety of non-immersive virtual reality exercising in stroke rehabilitation (EVREST): a randomised, multicentre, single-blind, controlled trial. Lancet Neurol 2016; 15: 1019–27.Google Scholar
Buma, F, Kwakkel, G, Ramsey, N. Understanding upper limb recovery after stroke. Restor Neurol Neurosci 2013; 31: 707–22.Google ScholarPubMed
Walshe, FM. Contributions of John Hughlings Jackson to neurology. A brief introduction to his teachings. Arch Neurol 1961; 5: 119–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gracies, J. Pathophysiology of spastic paresis. II: Emergence of muscle overactivity. Muscle Nerve 2005; 31: 552–71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gracies, JM. Pathophysiology of spastic paresis. I: Paresis and soft tissue changes. Muscle Nerve 2005; 31: 535–51.Google Scholar
O'Dwyer, NJ, Ada, L. Reflex hyperexcitability and muscle contracture in relation to spastic hypertonia. Curr Opin Neurol 1996; 9: 451–5.Google Scholar
O'Dwyer, NJ, Ada, L, Neilson, PD. Spasticity and muscle contracture following stroke. Brain 1996; 119: 1737–49.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carr, J, Shepperd, R. Optimizing functional motor recovery after stroke. In: Mehrholz, J, ed. Physical Therapy for the Stroke Patient: Early Stage Rehabilitation. New York, Stuttgart: Thieme; 2012: 51–133.Google Scholar
Lance, JW. Symposium synopsis. In: Feldman, RG, Young, RR, Koella, WP, eds. Spasticity: Disordered Motor Control. Chicago Year Book Medical Publications; 1980: 485–94.Google Scholar
Pandyan, AD, Gregoric, M, Barnes, MP, et al. Spasticity: clinical perceptions, neurological realities and meaningful measurement. Disabil Rehabil 2005; 27: 2–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pohl, M, Rockstroh, G, Rückriem, S, et al. Measurement of the effect of a bolus dose of intrathecal baclofen by continuous measurement of force under fibreglass casts. J Neurol 2002; 249: 1254–62.Google Scholar
Pohl, M, Rockstroh, G, Rückriem, S, et al. Time course of the effect of a bolus dose of intrathecal baclofen on severe cerebral spasticity. J Neurol 2003; 250: 1195–200.Google Scholar
Tardieu, G, Shentoub, S, Delarue, R. A la recherche d'une technique de mesure de la spasticité. Rev Neurol 1954; 91: 143–4.Google Scholar
Held, J, Pierrot-Deseilligny, E. Reeducation motrice des affections neurologiques. Paris: J-B Baillière; 1969.Google Scholar
Fosang, AL, Galea, MP, McCoy, AT, Reddihough, DS, Story, I. Measures of muscle and joint performance in the lower limb of children with cerebral palsy. Dev Med Child Neurol 2003; 45: 664–70.Google Scholar
Mehrholz, J, Major, Y, Meißner, D, et al. The influence of contractures and variation in measurement stretching velocity on the reliability of the modified Ashworth scale in patients with severe brain injury. Clin Rehabil 2005; 19: 63–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boyd, R, Ada, L. Physiotherapy management of spasticity. In: Barnes, M, Johnson, G, eds. Upper Motor Neuron Syndrome and Spasticity: Clinical Management and Neurophysiology. Cambridge University Press; 2001: 96–121.Google Scholar
Boyd, R, Graham, H. Objective measurement of clinical findings in the use of botulinum toxin type A in the management of spasticity in children with cerebral palsy. Eur J Neurol 1999; 6: S23–36.Google Scholar
Mehrholz, J, Wagner, K, Meißner, D, et al. Reliability of the modified Tardieu Scale and the modified Ashworth scale in adult patients with severe brain injury: a comparison study. Clin Rehabil 2005; 19: 751–9.Google Scholar
Walshe, FMR. On certain tonic or postural reflexes in hemiplegia, with special reference to the so-called “associated movements.” Brain 1923; 46: 1–37.Google Scholar
Ada, L, O'Dwyer, N. Do associated reactions in the upper limb after stroke contribute to contracture formation? Clin Rehabil 2001; 15: 186–94.Google Scholar
Ada, L, Canning, CG, Low, SL. Stroke patients have selective muscle weakness in shortened range. Brain 2003; 126: 724–31.Google Scholar
Hwang, IS, Tung, LC, Yang, JF, et al. Electromyographic analyses of global synkinesis in the paretic upper limb after stroke. Phys Ther 2005; 85: 755–65.Google Scholar
Platz, T, Eickhof, C, Nuyens, G, Vuadens, P. Clinical scales for the assessment of spasticity, associated phenomena, and function: a systematic review of the literature. Disabil Rehabil 2005; 27: 7–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pohl, M, Rückriem, S, Mehrholz, J, et al. Effectiveness of serial casting in patients with severe cerebral spasticity: a comparison study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2002; 83: 784–90.Google ScholarPubMed
Cramer, SC. Editorial comment – spasticity after stroke: what's the catch? Stroke 2004; 35: 139–40.Google Scholar
Sommerfeld, DK, Eek, EU, Svensson, AK, Holmqvist, LW, von Arbin, MH. Spasticity after stroke: its occurrence and association with motor impairments and activity limitations. Stroke 2004; 35: 134–9.Google Scholar
Walker, MF, Hoffmann, TC, Brady, MC, et al. Improving the development, monitoring and reporting of stroke rehabilitation research: consensus-based core recommendations from the stroke recovery and rehabilitation roundtable. Int J Stroke 2017; 12: 472–9.Google Scholar
Kwakkel, G, Lannin, NA, Borschmann, K, et al. Standardized measurement of sensorimotor recovery in stroke trials: consensus-based core recommendations from the stroke recovery and rehabilitation roundtable. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2017; 31: 784–92.Google Scholar
Bernhardt, J, Borschmann, K, Boyd, L, et al. Moving rehabilitation research forward: developing consensus statements for rehabilitation and recovery research. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2017; 31: 694–8.Google Scholar
Pollock, A, Gray, C, Culham, E, Durward, BR, Langhorne, P. Interventions for improving sit-to-stand ability following stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014; 5: CD007232.Google Scholar
Pollock, A, Baer, G, Campbell, P, et al. Physical rehabilitation approaches for the recovery of function and mobility following stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014; 4: CD001920.Google Scholar
Mehrholz, J, Elsner, B, Werner, C, Kugler, J, Pohl, M. Electromechanical-assisted training for walking after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013; 7: CD006185.Google Scholar
Colombo, G, Joerg, M, Schreier, R, Dietz, V. Treadmill training of paraplegic patients using a robotic orthosis. J Rehabil Res Devel 2000; 37: 693–700.Google Scholar
Hesse, S, Sarkodie-Gyan, T, Uhlenbrock, D. Development of an advanced mechanised gait trainer, controlling movement of the centre of mass, for restoring gait in non-ambulant subjects. Biomedizinische Technik 1999; 44: 194–201.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schmidt, H, Hesse, S, Bernhardt, R, Krüger, J. Hapticwalker – a novel haptic foot device. ACM Transactions on Applied Perception 2005; 2: 166–80.Google Scholar
Louie, DR, Eng, JJ. Powered robotic exoskeletons in post-stroke rehabilitation of gait: a scoping review. J Neuroeng Rehabil 2016; 13: 1–10.Google Scholar
Wall, A, Borg, J, Palmcrantz, S. Clinical application of the hybrid assistive limb (HAL) for gait training: a systematic review. Front Syst Neurosci 2015; 9: 48.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hesse, S, Schmidt, H, Werner, C, Bardeleben, A. Upper and lower extremity robotic devices for rehabilitation and for studying motor control. Curr Opin Neurol 2003; 16: 705–10.Google Scholar
Mehrholz, J, Thomas, S, Elsner, B. Treadmill training and body weight support for walking after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017; 8: CD002840.Google Scholar
Mehrholz, J, Kugler, J, Elsner, B. Network meta-analysis on randomized trials focusing on the effects of interventions for improving ambulation and gait related outcomes after stroke. Deutsches Ärzteblatt 2018; 115: 639–45.Google Scholar
Pohl, M, Mehrholz, J, Ritschel, C, Ruckriem, S. Speed-dependent treadmill training in ambulatory hemiparetic stroke patients: a randomized controlled trial. Stroke 2002; 33: 553–8.Google Scholar
Pollock, A, Farmer, SE, Brady, MC, et al. Interventions for improving upper limb function after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014; 11: CD010820.Google Scholar
Kwakkel, G, Veerbeek, JM, van Wegen, EE, Wolf, SL. Constraint-induced movement therapy after stroke. Lancet Neurol 2015; 14: 224–34.Google Scholar
Barzel, A, Ketels, G, Stark, A, et al. Home-based constraint-induced movement therapy for patients with upper limb dysfunction after stroke (HOMECIMT): a cluster-randomised, controlled trial. Lancet Neurol 2015; 14: 893–902.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nakayama, H, Jørgensen, HS, Raaschou, HO, Olsen, TS. Recovery of upper extremity function in stroke patients: the Copenhagen Stroke Study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1994; 75: 394–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Platz, T. Impairment-oriented training (IOT) – scientific concept and evidence-based treatment strategies. Restor Neurol Neurosci 2004; 22: 301–15.Google Scholar
Platz, T, Elsner, B, Mehrholz, J. Arm basis training and arm ability training: two impairment-oriented exercise training techniques for improving arm function after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015; 9: CD011854.Google Scholar
Platz, T. IOT impairment-oriented training. Schädigungs-orientiertes Training. Theorie und deutschsprachige Manuale für Therapie und Assessment. Arm-Basis-Training, Arm-Fähigkeits-training, Fugl-Meyer Test (Arm), TEMPA. Baden-Baden: Deutscher Wissenschafts-Verlag (DWV); 2006.Google Scholar
Platz, T, Winter, T, Müller, N, et al. Arm ability training for stroke and traumatic brain injury patients with mild arm paresis: a single-blind, randomized, controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2001; 82: 961–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Platz, T, van Kaick, S, Mehrholz, J, et al. Best conventional therapy versus modular impairment-oriented training for arm paresis after stroke: a single-blind, multicenter randomized controlled trial. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2009; 23: 706–16.Google Scholar
Platz, T, Eickhof, C, van Kaick, S, et al. Impairment-oriented training or Bobath therapy for severe arm paresis after stroke: a single-blind, multicentre randomized controlled trial. Clin Rehabil 2005; 19: 714–24.Google Scholar
Hatem, SM, Saussez, G, Della Faille, M, et al. Rehabilitation of motor function after stroke: a multiple systematic review focused on techniques to stimulate upper extremity recovery. Front Human Neurosci 2016; 10: 442.Google Scholar
Ramachandran, VS. Phantom limbs, neglect syndromes, repressed memory, and Freudian psychology. Int Rev Neurobiol 1994; 37: 291–333.Google Scholar
Ramachandran, VS, Altschuler, EL. The use of visual feedback, in particular mirror visual feedback, in restoring brain function. Brain 2009; 132: 1693–710.Google Scholar
Ramachandran, VS, Rogers-Ramachandran, D, Cobb, S. Touching the phantom limb. Nature 1995; 377: 489–90.Google Scholar
Ramachandran, VS, Rogers-Ramachandran, D. Synaesthesia in phantom limbs induced with mirrors. Biological Sci 1996; 263: 377–86.Google ScholarPubMed
Thieme, H, Morkisch, N, Mehrholz, J, et al. Mirror therapy for improving motor function after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2018; 7: CD008449.Google Scholar
Thieme, H, Morkisch, N, Rietz, C, Dohle, C, Borgetto, B. The efficacy of movement representation techniques for treatment of limb pain – a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal Pain 2016; 17: 167–80.Google Scholar
Burgar, C, Lum, P, Shor, P, van der Loos, H. Development of robots for rehabilitation therapy: the Palo Alto VA/Stanford experience. J Rehabil Res Dev 2000; 37: 663–73.Google Scholar
Krebs, HI, Hogan, N, Aisen, ML, Volpe, BT. Robot-aided neurorehabilitation. IEEE Trans Rehabil Eng 1998; 6: 75–87.Google Scholar
Reinkensmeyer, DJ, Kahn, LE, Averbuch, M, et al. Understanding and treating arm movement impairment after chronic brain injury: progress with the arm guide. J Rehabil Res Dev 2000; 37: 653–62.Google Scholar
Fazekas, G, Horvath, M, Troznai, T, Toth, A. Robot-mediated upper limb physiotherapy for patients with spastic hemiparesis: a preliminary study. J Rehabil Med 2007; 39: 580–2.Google Scholar
Coote, S, Stokes, EK. The effect of robot mediated therapy on upper extremity function following stroke – initial results. Ir J Med Sci 2003; 172: 26–7.Google Scholar
Riener, R, Nef, T, Colombo, G. Robot-aided neurorehabilitation of the upper extremities. Med Biol Eng Comput 2005; 43: 2–10.Google Scholar
Hwang, CH, Seong, JW, Son, DS. Individual finger synchronized robot-assisted hand rehabilitation in subacute to chronic stroke: a prospective randomized clinical trial of efficacy. Clin Rehabil 2012; 26: 696–704.Google Scholar
Kwakkel, G, Kollen, BJ, Krebs, HI. Effects of robot-assisted therapy on upper limb recovery after stroke: a systematic review. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2008; 22: 111–21.Google Scholar
Prange, GB, Jannink, MJ, Groothuis-Oudshoorn, CG, Hermens, HJ, Ijzerman, MJ. Systematic review of the effect of robot-aided therapy on recovery of the hemiparetic arm after stroke. J Rehabil Res Dev 2006; 43: 171–84.Google Scholar
Mehrholz, J, Pohl, M, Platz, T, Kugler, J, Elsner, B. Electromechanical and robot-assisted arm training for improving activities of daily living, arm function, and arm muscle strength after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2018; 9: CD006876.Google Scholar
Kwakkel, G, van Wegen, EE, Meskers, CM. Invited commentary on comparison of robotics, functional electrical stimulation, and motor learning methods for treatment of persistent upper extremity dysfunction after stroke: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2015; 96: 991–3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meyer, S, Karttunen, AH, Thijs, V, Feys, H, Verheyden, G. How do somatosensory deficits in the arm and hand relate to upper limb impairment, activity, and participation problems after stroke? A systematic review. Phys Ther 2014; 94: 1220–31.Google Scholar
Carey, L, Macdonell, R, Matyas, TA. Sense: study of the effectiveness of neurorehabilitation on sensation: a randomized controlled trial. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2011; 25: 304–13.Google Scholar
Saunders, DH, Sanderson, M, Hayes, S, et al. Physical fitness training for stroke patients. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016; 3: CD003316.Google ScholarPubMed
Högg, S. Die Effekte von Krafttraining auf die obere Extremität in der Rehabilitation nach Schlaganfall. Eine systematische Übersichtsarbeit. BSc thesis, SRH Hochschule für Gesundheit Gera; 2016.Google Scholar
Barker, AT, Jalinous, R, Freeston, IL. Non-invasive magnetic stimulation of human motor cortex. Lancet 1985; 1: 1106–7.Google Scholar
Bindman, LJ, Lippold, OC, Redfearn, JW. The action of brief polarizing currents on the cerebral cortex of the rat (1) during current flow and (2) in the production of long-lasting after-effects. J Physiol 1964; 172: 369–82.Google Scholar
Nitsche, MA, Paulus, W. Excitability changes induced in the human motor cortex by weak transcranial direct current stimulation. J Physiol 2000; 527: 633–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Priori, A, Berardelli, A, Rona, S, Accornero, N, Manfredi, M. Polarization of the human motor cortex through the scalp. Neuroreport 1998; 9: 2257–60.Google Scholar
Antal, A, Boros, K, Poreisz, C, et al. Comparatively weak after-effects of transcranial alternating current stimulation (TACS) on cortical excitability in humans. Brain Stimul 2008; 1: 97–105.Google Scholar
Tufail, Y, Matyushov, A, Baldwin, N, et al. Transcranial pulsed ultrasound stimulates intact brain circuits. Neuron 2010; 66: 681–94.Google Scholar
Nitsche, MA, Paulus, W. Sustained excitability elevations induced by transcranial DC motor cortex stimulation in humans. Neurology 2001; 57: 1899–901.Google Scholar
Nitsche, MA, Nitsche, MS, Klein, CC, et al. Level of action of cathodal DC polarisation induced inhibition of the human motor cortex. Clin Neurophysiol 2003; 114: 600–4.Google Scholar
List, J, Lesemann, A, Kubke, JC, et al. Impact of tDCS on cerebral autoregulation in aging and in patients with cerebrovascular diseases. Neurology 2015; 84: 626–8.Google Scholar
Vines, BW, Cerruti, C, Schlaug, G. Dual-hemisphere tDCS facilitates greater improvements for healthy subjects’ non-dominant hand compared to uni-hemisphere stimulation. BMC Neurosci 2008; 9: 103.Google Scholar
Liebetanz, D, Nitsche, MA, Tergau, F, Paulus, W. Pharmacological approach to the mechanisms of transcranial DC-stimulation-induced after-effects of human motor cortex excitability. Brain 2002; 125: 2238–47.Google Scholar
Nitsche, MA, Fricke, K, Henschke, U, et al. Pharmacological modulation of cortical excitability shifts induced by transcranial direct current stimulation in humans. J Physiol 2003; 553: 293–301.Google Scholar
Stagg, CJ, Best, JG, Stephenson, MC, et al. Polarity-sensitive modulation of cortical neurotransmitters by transcranial stimulation. J Neurosci 2009; 29: 5202–6.Google Scholar
Francis, JT, Gluckman, BJ, Schiff, SJ. Sensitivity of neurons to weak electric fields. J Neurosci 2003; 23: 7255–61.Google Scholar
Polania, R, Nitsche, MA, Paulus, W. Modulating functional connectivity patterns and topological functional organization of the human brain with transcranial direct current stimulation. Hum Brain Mapp 2011; 32: 1236–49.Google Scholar
Bikson, M, Inoue, M, Akiyama, H, et al. Effects of uniform extracellular DC electric fields on excitability in rat hippocampal slices in vitro. J Physiol 2004; 557: 175–90.Google Scholar
Antal, A, Keeser, D, Priori, A, Padberg, F, Nitsche, MA. Conceptual and procedural shortcomings of the systematic review “evidence that transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) generates little-to-no reliable neurophysiologic effect beyond MEP amplitude modulation in healthy human subjects: a systematic review” by Horvath and co-workers. Brain Stimul 2015; 8: 846–9.Google Scholar
Batsikadze, G, Moliadze, V, Paulus, W, Kuo, MF, Nitsche, MA. Partially non-linear stimulation intensity-dependent effects of direct current stimulation on motor cortex excitability in humans. J Physiol 2013; 591: 1987–2000.Google Scholar
Bikson, M, Name, A, Rahman, A. Origins of specificity during tDCS: anatomical, activity-selective, and input-bias mechanisms. Front Hum Neurosci 2013; 7: 688.Google Scholar
Nowak, DA, Grefkes, C, Ameli, M, Fink, GR. Interhemispheric competition after stroke: brain stimulation to enhance recovery of function of the affected hand. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2009; 23: 641–56.Google Scholar
Elsner, B, Pohl, M, Kugler, J, Mehrholz, J. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for improving activities of daily living, and physical and cognitive functioning, in people after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016; 3: CD009645.Google Scholar
Elsner, B, Kugler, J, Pohl, M, Mehrholz, J. Transcranial direct current stimulation for improving spasticity after stroke. A systematic review with meta-analysis. J Rehabil Med 2016; 48: 565–70.Google Scholar
Elsner, B, Pohl, M, Kugler, J, Mehrholz, J. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for improving aphasia and cognition in patients with aphasia after stroke (updated review). Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015; 11: CD009645.Google Scholar
Elsner, B, Kugler, J, Pohl, M, Mehrholz, J. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for idiopathic Parkinson's disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016; 7: CD010916.Google Scholar
Floel, A. tDCS-enhanced motor and cognitive function in neurological diseases. Neuroimage 2014; 85: 934–47.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Di Pino, G, Pellegrino, G, Assenza, G, et al. Modulation of brain plasticity in stroke: a novel model for neurorehabilitation. Nat Rev Neurol 2014; 10: 597–608.Google Scholar
Moos, K, Vossel, S, Weidner, R, Sparing, R, Fink, GR. Modulation of top-down control of visual attention by cathodal tDCS over right IPS. J Neurosci 2012; 32: 16360–8.Google Scholar
Ulm, L, McMahon, K, Copland, D, de Zubicaray, GI, Meinzer, M. Neural mechanisms underlying perilesional transcranial direct current stimulation in aphasia: a feasibility study. Front Hum Neurosci 2015; 9: 550.Google Scholar
Elsner, B, Kwakkel, G, Kugler, J, Mehrholz, J. Network meta-analysis of randomised trials on the effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for improving capacity in activities of daily living (ADL) and paretic arm function after stroke. J Neuroeng Rehabil 2017; 14: 95.Google Scholar
Zhang, L, Xing, G, Fan, Y, et al. Short- and long-term effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on upper limb motor function after stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Rehabil 2017; 31: 1137–53.Google Scholar
Brady, MC, Kelly, H, Godwin, J, Enderby, P, Campbell, P. Speech and language therapy for aphasia following stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016; 6: CD000425.Google Scholar
Meinzer, M, Darkow, R, Lindenberg, R, Floel, A. Electrical stimulation of the motor cortex enhances treatment outcome in post-stroke aphasia. Brain 2016; 139: 1152–63.Google Scholar
Goldenberg, G. Apraxia. Handb Clin Neurol 2008; 88: 323–38.Google Scholar
Park, JE. Apraxia: review and update. J Clin Neurol 2017; 13: 317–24.Google Scholar
Vanbellingen, T, Bohlhalter, S. Apraxia in neurorehabilitation: classification, assessment and treatment. NeuroRehabil 2011; 28: 91–8.Google Scholar
Bjorneby, ER, Reinvang, IR. Acquiring and maintaining self-care skills after stroke. The predictive value of apraxia. Scand J Rehabil Med 1985; 17: 75–80.Google Scholar
Sunderland, A, Shinner, C. Ideomotor apraxia and functional ability. Cortex 2007; 43: 359–67.Google Scholar
Vanbellingen, T, Kersten, B, Van Hemelrijk, B, et al. Comprehensive assessment of gesture production: a new test of upper limb apraxia (TULIA). Eur J Neurol 2010; 17: 59–66.Google Scholar
Liepmann, H. Apraxie. Vienna; Berlin: Urban & Schwarzenberg; 1920.Google Scholar
De Renzi, E, Motti, F, Nichelli, P. Imitating gestures. A quantitative approach to ideomotor apraxia. Arch Neurol 1980; 37: 6–10.Google Scholar
Zadikoff, C, Lang, AE. Apraxia in movement disorders. Brain 2005; 128: 1480–97.Google Scholar
Daumuller, M, Goldenberg, G. Therapy to improve gestural expression in aphasia: a controlled clinical trial. Clin Rehabil 2010; 24: 55–65.Google Scholar
Donkervoort, M, Stehmann-Saris, J, Deelman, BG. Efficacy of strategy training in left-hemisphere stroke patients with apraxia: a randomized controlled trial. Neuropsychol Rehabil 2001; 11: 549–66.Google Scholar
Smania, N, Aglioti, SM, Girardi, F, et al. Rehabilitation of limb apraxia improves daily life activities in patients with stroke. Neurology 2006; 67: 2050–2.Google Scholar
Vanbellingen, T, Kersten, B, van de Winckel, A, et al. A new bedside test of gestures in stroke: the apraxia screen of TULIA (AST). J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2011; 82: 389–92.Google Scholar
Vanbellingen, T, Lungu, C, Lopez, G, et al. Short and valid assessment of apraxia in Parkinson's disease. Parkinsonism Relat Disord 2012; 18: 348–50.Google Scholar
Kamm, CP, Heldner, MR, Vanbellingen, T, et al. Limb apraxia in multiple sclerosis: prevalence and impact on manual dexterity and activities of daily living. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2012; 93: 1081–5.Google Scholar
Bowen, A, Hazelton, C, Pollock, A, Lincoln, NB. Cognitive rehabilitation for spatial neglect following stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013; 7: CD003586.Google Scholar
Pollock, A, Hazelton, C, Henderson, CA, et al. Interventions for visual field defects in patients with stroke. Stroke 2012; 43: e37–8.Google Scholar
Chung, CS, Pollock, A, Campbell, T, Durward, BR, Hagen, S. Cognitive rehabilitation for executive dysfunction in adults with stroke or other adult non-progressive acquired brain damage. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013: 4: CD008391.Google Scholar
Elsner, B, Kugler, J, Pohl, M, Mehrholz, J. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for improving aphasia in patients with aphasia after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015: 5: CD009760.Google Scholar
George, S, Crotty, M, Gelinas, I, Devos, H. Rehabilitation for improving automobile driving after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014; 2: CD008357.Google Scholar
Loetscher, T, Lincoln, NB. Cognitive rehabilitation for attention deficits following stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013; 5: CD002842.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×