Limits...
Association Between Evoked Potentials and Balance Recovery in Subacute Hemiparetic Stroke Patients.

Lee SY, Kim BR, Han EY - Ann Rehabil Med (2015)

Bottom Line: Posturography outcomes were weight distribution indices (WDI) expressed as surface area (WDI-Sa) and pressure (WDI-Pr), and stability indices expressed as surface area (SI-Sa) and length (SI-L).In addition, all parameters were evaluated during eyes open (EO) and eyes closed (EC) conditions.Our findings suggest that initial assessments of MEPs and SSEPs might be beneficial when predicting balance recovery in subacute hemiparetic stroke patients.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Jeju National University Hospital, Jeju National University School of Medicine, Jeju, Korea.

ABSTRACT

Objective: To investigate the association between baseline motor evoked potential (MEP) and somatosensory evoked potential (SSEP) responses in the lower extremities and balance recovery in subacute hemiparetic stroke patients.

Methods: MEPs and SSEPs were evaluated in 20 subacute hemiparetic stroke patients before rehabilitation. Balance (static posturography and Berg Balance Scale [BBS]), motor function (Fugl-Meyer Assessment [FMA]) and the ability to perform activities of daily living (Modified Barthel Index [MBI]) were evaluated before rehabilitation and after four-weeks of rehabilitation. Posturography outcomes were weight distribution indices (WDI) expressed as surface area (WDI-Sa) and pressure (WDI-Pr), and stability indices expressed as surface area (SI-Sa) and length (SI-L). In addition, all parameters were evaluated during eyes open (EO) and eyes closed (EC) conditions.

Results: The MEP (+) group showed significant improvements in balance except WDI-Sa (EC), FMA, and MBI, while the MEP (-) group showed significant improvements in the BBS, FMA, and MBI after rehabilitation. The SSEP (+) group showed significant improvements in balance except SI-Sa (EO), FMA, and MBI, while the SSEPs (-) group showed significant improvements in the BBS, MBI after rehabilitation. The changes in the SI-Sa (EO), SI-L (EO), total MBI, and several detailed MBI subscales in the MEP (+) group after rehabilitation were significantly larger than those in the MEP (-) group.

Conclusion: Our findings suggest that initial assessments of MEPs and SSEPs might be beneficial when predicting balance recovery in subacute hemiparetic stroke patients.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Comparison of the group's balance, motor function, and activities of daily living function results (based on evoked potential responses) at the start of the study and after four weeks of rehabilitation. MEP, motor evoked potential; SI-Sa, stability index-surface area; SI-L, stability index-length; K-MBI, Korea version of Modified Barthel Index; EO, eye open. *p<0.05.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4496517&req=5

Figure 2: Comparison of the group's balance, motor function, and activities of daily living function results (based on evoked potential responses) at the start of the study and after four weeks of rehabilitation. MEP, motor evoked potential; SI-Sa, stability index-surface area; SI-L, stability index-length; K-MBI, Korea version of Modified Barthel Index; EO, eye open. *p<0.05.

Mentions: When comparing the changes of balance, motor and ADL functions before and after treatment between the MEP (+) group and MEP (-) group, the SI-Sa (EO) (-205.25±287.09 vs. -84.75±396.94, p=0.03), SI-L (EO) (-13.01±9.13 vs. -12.55±45.06, p=0.03), total K-MBI (22.83±7.58 vs. 12.50±6.76, p=0.01) and toileting (2.67±1.72 vs. 1.13±1.25, p=0.047) and ambulation (4.92±2.23 vs. 2.13±2.80, p=0.04) in the K-MBI subscales showed significant improvements in the MEP (+) group compared to the MEP (-) group. However, there was no significant difference in the changes of balance, motor, and ADL functions between SSEP (+) group and SSEP (-) group (Fig. 2).


Association Between Evoked Potentials and Balance Recovery in Subacute Hemiparetic Stroke Patients.

Lee SY, Kim BR, Han EY - Ann Rehabil Med (2015)

Comparison of the group's balance, motor function, and activities of daily living function results (based on evoked potential responses) at the start of the study and after four weeks of rehabilitation. MEP, motor evoked potential; SI-Sa, stability index-surface area; SI-L, stability index-length; K-MBI, Korea version of Modified Barthel Index; EO, eye open. *p<0.05.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4496517&req=5

Figure 2: Comparison of the group's balance, motor function, and activities of daily living function results (based on evoked potential responses) at the start of the study and after four weeks of rehabilitation. MEP, motor evoked potential; SI-Sa, stability index-surface area; SI-L, stability index-length; K-MBI, Korea version of Modified Barthel Index; EO, eye open. *p<0.05.
Mentions: When comparing the changes of balance, motor and ADL functions before and after treatment between the MEP (+) group and MEP (-) group, the SI-Sa (EO) (-205.25±287.09 vs. -84.75±396.94, p=0.03), SI-L (EO) (-13.01±9.13 vs. -12.55±45.06, p=0.03), total K-MBI (22.83±7.58 vs. 12.50±6.76, p=0.01) and toileting (2.67±1.72 vs. 1.13±1.25, p=0.047) and ambulation (4.92±2.23 vs. 2.13±2.80, p=0.04) in the K-MBI subscales showed significant improvements in the MEP (+) group compared to the MEP (-) group. However, there was no significant difference in the changes of balance, motor, and ADL functions between SSEP (+) group and SSEP (-) group (Fig. 2).

Bottom Line: Posturography outcomes were weight distribution indices (WDI) expressed as surface area (WDI-Sa) and pressure (WDI-Pr), and stability indices expressed as surface area (SI-Sa) and length (SI-L).In addition, all parameters were evaluated during eyes open (EO) and eyes closed (EC) conditions.Our findings suggest that initial assessments of MEPs and SSEPs might be beneficial when predicting balance recovery in subacute hemiparetic stroke patients.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Jeju National University Hospital, Jeju National University School of Medicine, Jeju, Korea.

ABSTRACT

Objective: To investigate the association between baseline motor evoked potential (MEP) and somatosensory evoked potential (SSEP) responses in the lower extremities and balance recovery in subacute hemiparetic stroke patients.

Methods: MEPs and SSEPs were evaluated in 20 subacute hemiparetic stroke patients before rehabilitation. Balance (static posturography and Berg Balance Scale [BBS]), motor function (Fugl-Meyer Assessment [FMA]) and the ability to perform activities of daily living (Modified Barthel Index [MBI]) were evaluated before rehabilitation and after four-weeks of rehabilitation. Posturography outcomes were weight distribution indices (WDI) expressed as surface area (WDI-Sa) and pressure (WDI-Pr), and stability indices expressed as surface area (SI-Sa) and length (SI-L). In addition, all parameters were evaluated during eyes open (EO) and eyes closed (EC) conditions.

Results: The MEP (+) group showed significant improvements in balance except WDI-Sa (EC), FMA, and MBI, while the MEP (-) group showed significant improvements in the BBS, FMA, and MBI after rehabilitation. The SSEP (+) group showed significant improvements in balance except SI-Sa (EO), FMA, and MBI, while the SSEPs (-) group showed significant improvements in the BBS, MBI after rehabilitation. The changes in the SI-Sa (EO), SI-L (EO), total MBI, and several detailed MBI subscales in the MEP (+) group after rehabilitation were significantly larger than those in the MEP (-) group.

Conclusion: Our findings suggest that initial assessments of MEPs and SSEPs might be beneficial when predicting balance recovery in subacute hemiparetic stroke patients.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus