Limits...
Bimanual reach to grasp movements after cervical spinal cord injury

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

Injury to the cervical spinal cord results in bilateral deficits in arm/hand function reducing functional independence and quality of life. To date little research has been undertaken to investigate control strategies of arm/hand movements following cervical spinal cord injury (cSCI). This study aimed to investigate unimanual and bimanual coordination in patients with acute cSCI using 3D kinematic analysis as they performed naturalistic reach to grasp actions with one hand, or with both hands together (symmetrical task), and compare this to the movement patterns of uninjured younger and older adults. Eighteen adults with a cSCI (mean 61.61 years) with lesions at C4-C8, with an American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) grade B to D and 16 uninjured younger adults (mean 23.68 years) and sixteen uninjured older adults (mean 70.92 years) were recruited. Participants with a cSCI produced reach-to-grasp actions which took longer, were slower, and had longer deceleration phases than uninjured participants. These differences were exacerbated during bimanual reach-to-grasp tasks. Maximal grasp aperture was no different between groups, but reached earlier by people with cSCI. Participants with a cSCI were less synchronous than younger and older adults but all groups used the deceleration phase for error correction to end the movement in a synchronous fashion. Overall, this study suggests that after cSCI a level of bimanual coordination is retained. While there seems to be a greater reliance on feedback to produce both the reach to grasp, we observed minimal disruption of the more impaired limb on the less impaired limb. This suggests that bimanual movements should be integrated into therapy.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Group means (±standard error) for absolute interlimb synchrony at movement onset, peak velocity, start of the final adjustment phase and end of the movement.(‡ represents a significant difference between groups), (cSCI = cervical Spinal Cord Injury, YA = non-injured younger adults, OA = non-injured older adults).
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC5383293&req=5

pone.0175457.g004: Group means (±standard error) for absolute interlimb synchrony at movement onset, peak velocity, start of the final adjustment phase and end of the movement.(‡ represents a significant difference between groups), (cSCI = cervical Spinal Cord Injury, YA = non-injured younger adults, OA = non-injured older adults).

Mentions: Differences between the groups were noted for MO [F(2,46) = 3.73, p<0.05, η2 = 0.14], PV [F(2,46) = 7.67, p<0.01, η2 = 0.25], start of final adjustment phase (FAP) [F(2,46) = 14.38, p<0.001, η2 = 0.38], and END [F(2,46) = 6.89, p<0.01, η2 = 0.23] (Fig 4). Overall, analyses showed that participants with a cSCI were less synchronous than YA at the start, and less synchronous than both UP groups at each further time point. Fig 4 clearly indicates that irrespective of group the limbs become more synchronous between the start of FAP and END.


Bimanual reach to grasp movements after cervical spinal cord injury
Group means (±standard error) for absolute interlimb synchrony at movement onset, peak velocity, start of the final adjustment phase and end of the movement.(‡ represents a significant difference between groups), (cSCI = cervical Spinal Cord Injury, YA = non-injured younger adults, OA = non-injured older adults).
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC5383293&req=5

pone.0175457.g004: Group means (±standard error) for absolute interlimb synchrony at movement onset, peak velocity, start of the final adjustment phase and end of the movement.(‡ represents a significant difference between groups), (cSCI = cervical Spinal Cord Injury, YA = non-injured younger adults, OA = non-injured older adults).
Mentions: Differences between the groups were noted for MO [F(2,46) = 3.73, p<0.05, η2 = 0.14], PV [F(2,46) = 7.67, p<0.01, η2 = 0.25], start of final adjustment phase (FAP) [F(2,46) = 14.38, p<0.001, η2 = 0.38], and END [F(2,46) = 6.89, p<0.01, η2 = 0.23] (Fig 4). Overall, analyses showed that participants with a cSCI were less synchronous than YA at the start, and less synchronous than both UP groups at each further time point. Fig 4 clearly indicates that irrespective of group the limbs become more synchronous between the start of FAP and END.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

Injury to the cervical spinal cord results in bilateral deficits in arm/hand function reducing functional independence and quality of life. To date little research has been undertaken to investigate control strategies of arm/hand movements following cervical spinal cord injury (cSCI). This study aimed to investigate unimanual and bimanual coordination in patients with acute cSCI using 3D kinematic analysis as they performed naturalistic reach to grasp actions with one hand, or with both hands together (symmetrical task), and compare this to the movement patterns of uninjured younger and older adults. Eighteen adults with a cSCI (mean 61.61 years) with lesions at C4-C8, with an American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) grade B to D and 16 uninjured younger adults (mean 23.68 years) and sixteen uninjured older adults (mean 70.92 years) were recruited. Participants with a cSCI produced reach-to-grasp actions which took longer, were slower, and had longer deceleration phases than uninjured participants. These differences were exacerbated during bimanual reach-to-grasp tasks. Maximal grasp aperture was no different between groups, but reached earlier by people with cSCI. Participants with a cSCI were less synchronous than younger and older adults but all groups used the deceleration phase for error correction to end the movement in a synchronous fashion. Overall, this study suggests that after cSCI a level of bimanual coordination is retained. While there seems to be a greater reliance on feedback to produce both the reach to grasp, we observed minimal disruption of the more impaired limb on the less impaired limb. This suggests that bimanual movements should be integrated into therapy.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus