Abstract

BackgroundThe dramatic consequences of stroke on patient autonomy in daily living activities urged the need for new reliable therapeutic strategies. Recently, bimanual training has emerged as a promising tool to improve the functional recovery of upper-limbs in stroke patients. However, who could benefit from bimanual therapy and how it could be used as a part of a more complete rehabilitation protocol remain largely unknown. A possible reason explaining this situation is that coupling and symmetry-breaking mechanisms, two fundamental principles governing bimanual behaviour, have been largely under-explored in both research and rehabilitation in stroke.DiscussionBimanual coordination emerges as an active, task-specific assembling process where the limbs are constrained to act as a single unit by virtue of mutual coupling. Consequently, exploring, assessing, re-establishing and exploiting functional bimanual synergies following stroke, require moving beyond the classical characterization of performance of each limb in separate and isolated fashion, to study coupling signatures at both neural and behavioural levels. Grounded on the conceptual framework of the dynamic system approach to bimanual coordination, we debated on two main assumptions: 1) stroke-induced impairment of bimanual coordination might be anticipated/understood by comparing, in join protocols, changes in coupling strength and asymmetry of bimanual discrete movements observed in healthy people and those observed in stroke; 2) understanding/predicting behavioural manifestations of decrease in bimanual coupling strength and/or increase in interlimb asymmetry might constitute an operational prerequisite to adapt therapy and better target training at the specific needs of each patient. We believe that these statements draw new directions for experimental and clinical studies and contribute in promoting bimanual training as an efficient and adequate tool to facilitate the paretic upper-limb recovery and to restore spontaneous bimanual synergies.SummarySince bimanual control deficits have scarcely been systematically investigated, the eventual benefits of bimanual coordination practice in stroke rehabilitation remains poorly understood. In the present paper we argued that a better understanding of coupling and symmetry-breaking mechanisms in both the undamaged and stroke-lesioned neuro-behavioral system should provide a better understanding of stroke-related alterations of bimanual synergies, and help clinicians to adapt therapy in order to maximize rehabilitation benefits.

Highlights

  • The dramatic consequences of stroke on patient autonomy in daily living activities urged the need for new reliable therapeutic strategies

  • In the present paper we argued that a better understanding of coupling and symmetry-breaking mechanisms in both the undamaged and strokelesioned neuro-behavioral system should provide a better understanding of stroke-related alterations of bimanual synergies, and help clinicians to adapt therapy in order to maximize rehabilitation benefits

  • As most of our daily living activities require the use of both hands [17], disruptions of bimanual coordination induced by cerebral vascular accident (CVA) lesions constitute an additional handicap for stroke patients

Read more

Summary

Discussion

Coupling as a fundamental mechanism of bimanual coordination In the undamaged NMSS, the motion of the limbs can be coordinated with seemingly unlimited temporal and spatial relationships, in either discrete or cyclical movements. Join protocols to study symmetry-breaking of bimanual coordination in the undamaged and in CVA-lesioned neuro-behavioral systems Our main assumption is that, in a bilateral coordination task, shifts in relative timing between limbs express the results of counteracting effects of attraction and symmetry-breaking factors These factors may originate in stroke-induced weakness of neural coupling between limbs and/or in difference in neuro-muscular stiffness between the paretic and non-paretic limbs (e.g., spasticity), respectively. Competing interests The authors declare that they have no competing interests

Background
Frizzell JP
19. Carson RG
31. Kelso J: Dynamic patterns
35. Kelso JA
40. Kelso JAS
71. Fitts PM
76. Sherwood DE
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.