Stroke can impair manual dexterity, leading to loss of independence following incomplete recovery. Enhancing our understanding of dexterity impairment may improve neurorehabilitation.
Objectives
The study aimed to measure dexterity components in acute stroke patients with and without hand motor deficits, compare them to those of healthy controls (HC), and to explore the neural substrates involved in specific components of dexterity.
Methods
We used the Dextrain Manipulandum to quantify fine finger force control, finger selection accuracy, coactivation, and reaction time (RT). Dexterity was evaluated twice (2 days apart) in 74 patients and 14 HC. Voxel-Lesion-Symptom-Mapping (VLSM) was used to analyze the relationship between tissue damage and dexterity. Results. Due to severe paresis or fatigue, 24 patients could not perform these tasks. In 50 patients (included 4.6 ± 3.3 days post-stroke), finger force control improved (P < .001), as it did in HC (P = .03) who performed better than patients on both evaluations. Accuracy of finger selection did not improve significantly in any group, but the HC performed better on both evaluations. Unexpectedly, coactivation was better in patients than in HC at D3 (P = .03). There were no between-group differences in RT. VLSM showed that damage to the superior temporal gyrus (STG) impaired finger force control while damage to the posterior limb of the internal capsule (PLIC) impaired finger selectivity.
Conclusions
Acute stroke affecting the STG or PLIC impaired selective components of dexterity. Patients with mild to moderate impairment showed better finger force control and accuracy selection within 48 hours, suggesting the feasibility of detecting early dexterity improvements.
ElangovanNChangCMGaoGLiarokapisM.An accessible, open-source dexterity test: evaluating the grasping and dexterous manipulation capabilities of humans and robots. Front Robot AI. 2022;9:808154.
2.
CanningCGAdaLO’DwyerNJ.Abnormal muscle activation characteristics associated with loss of dexterity after stroke. J Neurol Sci. 2000;176:45-56.
KwakkelGKollenBJvan der GrondJPrevoAJ.Probability of regaining dexterity in the flaccid upper limb: impact of severity of paresis and time since onset in acute stroke. Stroke. 2003;34(9):2181-2186.
5.
JohnsonWOnumaOOwolabiMSachdevS.Stroke: a global response is needed. Bull World Health Organ. 2016;94(9):634-634A.
6.
NijlandRHvan WegenEEHarmeling-van der WelBCKwakkelGInvestigatorsE.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(4):745-750.
7.
XuJEjazNHertlerB, et al. Separable systems for recovery of finger strength and control after stroke. J Neurophysiol. 2017;118(2):1151-1163.
8.
JørgensenHSNakayamaHRaaschouHOVive-LarsenJStøierMOlsenTS.Outcome and time course of recovery in stroke. Part II: time course of recovery. The Copenhagen Stroke Study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1995;76:406-412.
9.
LaiSMStudenskiSDuncanPWPereraS.Persisting consequences of stroke measured by the Stroke Impact Scale. Stroke. 2002;33(7):1840-1844.
10.
PennatiGVPlantinJCarmentL, et al. Recovery and prediction of dynamic precision grip force control after stroke. Stroke. 2020;51(3):944-951.
11.
SalePMazzoleniSLombardiV, et al. Recovery of hand function with robot-assisted therapy in acute stroke patients: a randomized-controlled trial. Int J Rehabil Res. 2014;37(3):236-242.
12.
KnutsonJSFriedlASHansenKM, et al. Efficacy of contralaterally controlled functional electrical stimulation compared to cyclic neuromuscular electrical stimulation and task-oriented training for recovery of hand function after stroke: study protocol for a multi-site randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2022;23(1):397.
13.
TeremetzMColleFHamdounSMaierMALindbergPG.A novel method for the quantification of key components of manual dexterity after stroke. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2015;12:64.
14.
IsraelySLeismanGCarmeliE.Improvement in arm and hand function after a stroke with task-oriented training. BMJ Case Rep. 2017;2017:bcr2017219250.
15.
FranceschiniMCeravoloMGAgostiM, et al. Clinical relevance of action observation in upper-limb stroke rehabilitation: a possible role in recovery of functional dexterity. A randomized clinical trial. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2012;26(5):456-462.
16.
SobinovARBensmaiaSJ.The neural mechanisms of manual dexterity. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2021;22(12):741-757.
17.
JohanssonRSFlanaganJR.Coding and use of tactile signals from the fingertips in object manipulation tasks. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2009;10(5):345-359.
18.
Roby-BramiAJarrasseNParryR.Impairment and compensation in dexterous upper-limb function after stroke. From the direct consequences of pyramidal tract lesions to behavioral involvement of both upper-limbs in daily activities. Front Hum Neurosci. 2021;15:662006.
19.
LangCESchieberMH.Differential impairment of individuated finger movements in humans after damage to the motor cortex or the corticospinal tract. J Neurophysiol. 2003;90:1160-1170.
20.
BirchenallJTeremetzMRocaP, et al. Individual recovery profiles of manual dexterity, and relation to corticospinal lesion load and excitability after stroke -a longitudinal pilot study. Neurophysiol Clin. 2019;49(2):149-164.
21.
CaminitiRBorraEVisco-ComandiniFBattaglia-MayerAAverbeckBBLuppinoG.Computational architecture of the parieto-frontal network underlying cognitive-motor control in monkeys. eNeuro. 2017;4(1):ENEURO.0306-16.2017.
22.
CaminitiRInnocentiGMBattaglia-MayerA.Organization and evolution of parieto-frontal processing streams in macaque monkeys and humans. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2015;56:73-96.
23.
CareyLMMatyasTABaumC.Effects of somatosensory impairment on participation after stroke. Am J Occup Ther. 2018;72:7203205100p1-7203205100p10.
24.
BinkofskiFBuccinoGStephanKMRizzolattiGSeitzRJFreundH-J.A parieto-premotor network for object manipulation: evidence from neuroimaging. Exp Brain Res. 1999;128:210-213.
25.
NowakDATimmannDHermsdorferJ.Dexterity in cerebellar agenesis. Neuropsychologia. 2007;45(4):696-703.
26.
WenzelburgerRKopperFFrenzelA, et al. Hand coordination following capsular stroke. Brain. 2005;128(Pt 1):64-74.
27.
FriesWDanekAScheidtmannKHamburgerC.Motor recovery following capsular stroke. Role of descending pathways from multiple motor areas. Brain. 1993;116(Pt 2):369-382.
28.
LangCEDeJongSLBeebeJA.Recovery of thumb and finger extension and its relation to grasp performance after stroke. J Neurophysiol. 2009;102(1):451-459.
29.
ZatsiorskyVMLatashML.Multifinger prehension: an overview. J Mot Behav. 2008;40(5):446-476.
30.
YueZZhangXWangJ.Hand rehabilitation robotics on poststroke motor recovery. Behav Neurol. 2017;2017:3908135.
31.
BernhardtJHaywardKSKwakkelG, et al. Agreed definitions and a shared vision for new standards in stroke recovery research: the stroke recovery and rehabilitation roundtable taskforce. Int J Stroke. 2017;12(5):444-450.
32.
BrottTAdamsHPJrOlingerCP, et al. Measurements of acute cerebral infarction: a clinical examination scale. Stroke. 1989;20(7):864-870.
33.
WHO. Classification internationale du fonctionnement, du handicap et de la santé: CIF. WHO; 2001.
34.
Fugl-MeyerAJääsköLLeymanIOlssonSSteglindS.The post-stroke hemiplegic patient.I. A method for evaluation of physical performance. Scand J Rehab Med. 1975:13-31.
35.
NasreddineZSPhillipsNABédirianV, et al. The Montreal cognitive assessment, MoCA: a brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2005;53:695-699.
36.
O’DellMWKimGRiveraL, et al. A psychometric evaluation of the Arm Motor Ability Test. J Rehabil Med. 2013;45(6):519-527.
37.
SongKGuanMLiW, et al. Acute ischemic stroke patients with diffusion-weighted imaging-Alberta Stroke Program Early Computed Tomography Score </= 5 can benefit from endovascular treatment: a single-center experience and literature review. Neuroradiology. 2019;61(4):451-459.
MaiJKMajtanikMPaxinosG. Atlas of the Human Brain. Elsevier Science; 2015.
40.
BoydLAWinsteinCJ.Providing explicit information disrupts implicit motor learning after basal ganglia stroke. Learn Mem. 2004;11(4):388-396.
41.
WangYZhaoJInadaHNegyesiJNagatomiR.Impact of handedness on interlimb transfer depending on the task complexity combined with motor and cognitive skills. Neurosci Lett. 2022;785:136775.
42.
LindbergPGVerneauMBoterffQLCuenca-MaiaMBaronJCMaierMA.Age- and task-dependent effects of cerebellar tDCS on manual dexterity and motor learning-A preliminary study. Neurophysiol Clin. 2022;52(5):354-365.
43.
CramerSC.Repairing the human brain after stroke: I. Mechanisms of spontaneous recovery. Ann Neurol. 2008;63(3):272-287.
44.
KarnathH.New insights into the functions of the superior temporal cortex. Nature. 2001;2:568-576.
45.
BaiSLiuWGuanY.The visuospatial and sensorimotor functions of posterior parietal cortex in drawing tasks: a review. Front Aging Neurosci. 2021;13:717002.
46.
CataniMThiebaut de SchottenM.A diffusion tensor imaging tractography atlas for virtual in vivo dissections. Cortex. 2008;44(8):1105-1132.
47.
DavareMLemonROlivierE.Selective modulation of interactions between ventral premotor cortex and primary motor cortex during precision grasping in humans. J Physiol. 2008;586(11):2735-2742.
48.
SunJHuangJWangAZhangMTangX.The role of the interaction between the inferior parietal lobule and superior temporal gyrus in the multisensory Go/No-go task. Neuroimage. 2022;254:119140.
49.
NakataHSakamotoKFerrettiA, et al. Executive functions with different motor outputs in somatosensory Go/Nogo tasks: an event-related functional MRI study. Brain Res Bull. 2008;77(4):197-205.
50.
KarnathHFerberSHimmelbachM.Spatial awareness is a function of the temporal not the posterior parietal lobe. Nature. 2001;411:950-953.
51.
ZuberPGaetanoLGriffaA, et al. Additive and interaction effects of working memory and motor sequence training on brain functional connectivity. Sci Rep. 2021;11(1):23089.
52.
CaffarraPGardiniSVezzadiniGBromileyAVenneriA.The ideation of movement is supported by fronto-temporal cortical regions involved in the retrieval of semantic knowledge. Acta Biomed. 2010;81:21-29.
53.
KravitzDJSaleemKSBakerCIMishkinM.A new neural framework for visuospatial processing. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2011;12(4):217-230.
54.
PlantinJGodboltAKPennatiGV, et al. Motor inhibition and its contribution to recovery of dexterous hand use after stroke. Brain Commun. 2022;4:fcac241.
55.
WolbrechtETRoweJBChanVIngemansonMLCramerSCReinkensmeyerDJ.Finger strength, individuation, and their interaction: relationship to hand function and corticospinal tract injury after stroke. Clin Neurophysiol. 2018;129(4):797-808.
56.
HongJHSonSMJangSH.Identification of spinothalamic tract and its related thalamocortical fibers in human brain. Neurosci Lett. 2010;468(2):102-105.
57.
MeyerSKessnerSSChengB, et al. Voxel-based lesion-symptom mapping of stroke lesions underlying somatosensory deficits. Neuroimage Clin. 2016;10:257-266.
58.
SchulzRParkCHBoudriasMHGerloffCHummelFCWardNS.Assessing the integrity of corticospinal pathways from primary and secondary cortical motor areas after stroke. Stroke. 2012;43(8):2248-2251.
59.
UsudaNSugawaraSKFukuyamaHNakazawaKAmemiyaKNishimuraY.Quantitative comparison of corticospinal tracts arising from different cortical areas in humans. Neurosci Res. 2022;183:30-49.
60.
MorecraftRJHerrickJLStilwell-MorecraftKS, et al. Localization of arm representation in the corona radiata and internal capsule in the non-human primate. Brain. 2002;125(Pt 1):176-198.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
