Search

BackgroundA key component of safe driving is a well-timed braking performance. Stroke-related decline in motor and cognitive processes slows braking response and puts individuals with stroke at a higher risk for car crashes. Although the impact of cognitive training on driving has been extensively investigated, the influence of motor interventions and their effectiveness in enhancing specific driving-related skills after stroke remains less understood. We compare the effectiveness of two motor interventions (force-control vs. strength training) to facilitate braking, an essential skill for safe driving.MethodsTwenty-two stroke survivors were randomized to force-control training or strength training. Before and after training, participants performed a braking task during car-following in a driving simulator. We quantified the cognitive and motor components of the braking task with cognitive processing time and movement execution time.ResultsThe cognitive processing time did not change for either training group. In contrast, the movement execution became significantly faster (14%) following force-control training but not strength training. In addition, task-specific effects of training were found in each group. The force-control group showed improved accuracy and steadiness of ankle movements, whereas the strength training group showed increased dorsiflexion strength following training.ConclusionMotor intervention that trains ankle force control in stroke survivors improves the speed of movement execution during braking. Driving rehabilitation after stroke might benefit from incorporating force-control training to enhance the movement speed for a well-timed braking response.

Purpose: Increased gait variability in stroke survivors indicates poor dynamic balance and poses a heightened risk of falling. Two primary motor impairments linked with impaired gait are declines in movement precision and strength. The purpose of the study is to determine whether force-control training or strength training is more effective in reducing gait variability in chronic stroke survivors.Methods: Twenty-two chronic stroke survivors were randomized to force-control training or strength training. Participants completed four training sessions over 2 weeks with increasing intensity. The force-control group practiced increasing and decreasing ankle forces while tracking a sinusoid. The strength group practiced fast ankle motor contractions at a percentage of their maximal force. Both forms of training involved unilateral, isometric contraction of the paretic, and non-paretic ankles in plantarflexion and dorsiflexion. Before and after the training, we assessed gait variability as stride length and stride time variability, and gait speed. To determine the task-specific effects of training, we measured strength, accuracy, and steadiness of ankle movements.Results: Stride length variability and stride time variability reduced significantly after force-control training, but not after strength training. Both groups showed modest improvements in gait speed. We found task-specific effects with strength training improving plantarflexion and dorsiflexion strength and force control training improving motor accuracy and steadiness.Conclusion: Force-control training is superior to strength training in reducing gait variability in chronic stroke survivors. Improving ankle force control may be a promising approach to rehabilitate gait variability and improve safe mobility post-stroke.

Background: The two primary motor impairments that hinder function after stroke are declines in strength and motor control. The impact of motor impairments on functional capacity may vary with the severity of stroke motor impairments. In this study, we focus on high-functioning stroke individuals who experience mild to moderate motor impairments and often resume prior activities or return to work. These tasks require the ability to move independently, placing high demands on their functional mobility. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to quantify impairments in strength and motor control and their contribution to functional mobility in high-functioning stroke.Methods:Twenty-one high-functioning stroke individuals (Fugl Meyer Lower Extremity Score = 28.67 ± 4.85; Functional Activity Index = 28.47 ± 7.04) and 21 age-matched healthy controls participated in this study. To examine motor impairments in strength and motor control, participants performed the following tasks with the paretic ankle (1) maximum voluntary contractions (MVC) and (2) visuomotor tracking of a sinusoidal trajectory. Strength was quantified as the maximum force produced during ankle plantarflexion and dorsiflexion. Motor control was quantified as (a) the accuracy and (b) variability of ankle movement during the visuomotor tracking task. For functional mobility, participants performed (1) overground walking for 7 meters and (2) simulated driving task. Functional mobility was determined by walking speed, stride length variability, and braking reaction time.Results: Compared with the controls, the stroke group showed decreased plantarflexion strength, decreased accuracy, and increased variability of ankle movement. In addition, the stroke group demonstrated decreased walking speed, increased stride length variability, and increased braking reaction time. The multiple-linear regression model revealed that motor accuracy was a significant predictor of the walking speed and braking reaction time. Further, motor variability was a significant predictor of stride length variability. Finally, the dorsiflexion or plantarflexion strength did not predict walking speed, stride length variability or braking reaction time.Conclusions: The impairments in motor control but not strength predict functional deficits in walking and driving in high-functioning stroke individuals. Therefore, rehabilitation interventions assessing and improving motor control will potentially enhance functional outcomes in high-functioning stroke survivors.