Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Constraint-induced movement therapy to enhance recovery after stroke

  • Published:
Current Atherosclerosis Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A therapeutic approach to rehabilitation of movement after stroke, termed constraint-induced (CI) movement therapy, has been derived from basic research with monkeys given somatosensory deafferentation. CI therapy consists of a family of therapies; their common element is that they induce persons with stroke to greatly increase the use of a more-affected upper extremity (UE) for many hours a day over a 2- to 3-week period. These therapies have significantly improved quality of movement and substantially increased amount of use of a more-affected UE in the activities of daily living in life situations. A number of neuroimaging and transcranial magnetic stimulation studies have shown that the massed practice of CI therapy produces a massive use-dependent cortical reorganization that increases the area of cortex involved in the innervation of movement of the more-affected UE. The intensity and schedule of delivery of this very efficacious therapy is quite different from that of more traditional physical rehabilitation approaches. As a result, to be clinically applicable, the CI therapy approach to rehabilitation will likely require a paradigm shift in the delivery of physical rehabilitation services.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References and Recommended Reading

  1. Broderick J, Brott T, Kothari R, et al.: The Greater Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky stroke study: preliminary first-ever and total incidence rates of stroke among blacks. Stroke 1998, 29: 415–421.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Stineman MG, Maislin G, Fiedler RC, Granger CV: A prediction model for functional recovery in stroke. Stroke 1997, 28: 550–556.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Duncan PW: Synthesis of intervention trials to improve motor recovery following stroke. Top Stroke Rehabil 1997, 3: 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Taub E: Somatosensory deafferentation research with monkeys: implications for rehabilitation medicine. In Behavioral Psychology in Rehabilitation Medicine: Clinical Applications. Edited by Ince LP: New York: Williams & Wilkins; 1980:371–401.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Taub E, Miller NE, Novack TA, et al.: Technique to improve chronic motor deficit after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1993, 74: 347–354.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Taub E: Overcoming learned nonuse: a new behavioral medicine approach to physical medicine. In Clinical Applied Psychophysiology. Edited by Carlson JG, Seifert SR, Birbaumer N. New York: Plenum; 1994:185–220.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Taub E, Burgio L, Miller NE, et al.: An operant approach to overcoming learned nonuse after CNS damage in monkeys and man: the role of shaping. J Exp Anal Behav 1994, 61: 281–293.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Taub E, Crago JE: Behavioral plasticity following central nervous system damage in monkeys and man. In Maturational Windows and Adult Cortical Plasticity. SFI Studies in the Sciences of Complexity. Edited by Julesz B, Kovacs I. Redwood City, CA: Addison-Wesley; 1995:201–215.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Taub E, Crago JE: Overcoming learned nonuse: a new behavioral approach to physical medicine. In Biobehavioral Self-Regulation: Eastern and Western Perspectives. Edited by Kikuchi T, Sakuma H, Saito I, Tsuboi K. Tokyo: Springer Verlag; 1995:2–9.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Taub E, Pidikiti RD, Deluca SC, Crago JE. Effects of motor restriction of an unimpaired upper extremity and training on improving functional and altering brain/behaviors. In Imaging and Neurologic Rehabilitation. Edited by Toole J. New York: Demons; 1996:133–154.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Taub E, Wolf SL: Constraint-induced (CT) movement techniques to facilitate upper extremity use in stroke patients. Top Stroke Rehabil 1997, 3: 38–61.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Morris D, Crago J, DeLuca S, et al.: Constraint-induced (CI) movement therapy for motor recovery after stroke. Neurorehab 1997, 9: 29–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Taub E, Crago JE, Uswatte G: Constraint-induced movement therapy: a new approach to treatment in physical rehabilitation. Rehabil Psychol 1998, 43: 152–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Miltner WH, Bauder H, Sommer M, et al.: Effects of constraint-induced movement therapy on chronic stroke patients: a replication. Stroke 1999, 30: 586–592.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Kunkel A, Kopp B, Muller G, et al.: Constraint-induced movement therapy: a powerful new technique to induce motor recovery in chronic stroke patients. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1999, 80: 624–628.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Uswatte G, Taub E: Constraint-induced movement therapy: new approaches to outcome measurement in rehabilitation. In Cognitive Neurorehabilitation: A Comprehensive Approach. Edited by Stuss DT, Winocur G, Robertson IH. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; in press.

  17. Taub E, Uswatte G: A new approach to treatment and measurement in physical rehabilitation: constraint-induced (CI) movement therapy. In Handbook of Rehabilitation Psychology. Edited by Frank RG, Elliot TR. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Taub E, Uswatte G, Pidikiti RD: Constraint-induced movement therapy, a new family of techniques with broad application to physical rehabilitation—a clinical review. J Rehab Res Dev. 1999, 36: 237–251.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Knapp HD, Taub E, Berman AJ: Effects of deafferentation on a conditioned avoidance response. Science 1958, 128: 842–843.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Knapp HD, Taub E, Berman AJ: Movement in monkeys with deafferented limbs. Exp Neurol 1963, 7: 305–315.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Taub E: Motor behavior following deafferentation in the developing and motorically mature monkey. In Neural Control of Locomotion. Edited by Herman R, Grillner S, Ralson HJ, Stein PSG, Stuart D. New York: Plenum; 1976:675–705.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Taub E: Movement in nonhuman primates deprived of somatosensory feedback. In Exercise and Sports Science Reviews. Santa Barbara: Journal Publishing Affiliates; 1977:335–374.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Taub E, Bacon R, Berman AJ: The acquisition of a trace-conditioned avoidance response after deafferentation of the responding limb. J Comp Physiol Psychol 1965, 58: 275–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Taub E, Berman AJ: Avoidance conditioning in the absence of relevant proprioceptive and exteroceptive feedback. J Comp Physiol 1963, 56: 1012–1016.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Morgan WG: The shaping game: a teaching technique. Behav Ther 1974, 5: 271–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Panyan MV: How to Use Shaping. Lawrence, KS: H & H Enterprises; 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Skinner BF: The Behavior of Organisms. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts; 1938.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Skinner BF: The Technology of Teaching. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts; 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Jenkins WM, Merzenich MM, Ochs MT, et al.: Functional reorganization of primary somatosensory cortex in adult owl monkeys after behaviorally controlled tactile stimulation. J of Neurophysiology 1990, 63: 82–104.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Recanzone GH, Jenkins WM, Merzenich MM: Progressive improvement in discriminative abilities in adult owl monkeys performing a tactile frequency discrimination task. J of Neurophysiology 1992, 67: 1015–1030.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Recanzone GH, Merszenich MM, Jenkins WM: Frequency discrimination training engaging a restricted skin surface results in emergence of a cutatneous response zone in cortical area 3a. J Neurophysiol 1992, 67: 1057–1070.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Recanzone GH, Merzenich MM, Jenkins WM, et al.: Topographic reorganization of the hand representation in area 3b of owl monkeys trained in a frequency discrimination task. J Neurophysiol 1992, 67: 1031–1056.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Elbert T, Pantev C, Wienbruch C, et al.: Increased use of the left hand in string players associated with increased cortical representation of the fingers. Science 1995, 220: 21–23.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Sterr A, Mueller MM, Elbert T, et al.: Changed perceptions in Braille readers. Nature 1988, 391: 134–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Pons TP, Garraghty AK, Ommaya AK, et al.: Massive cortical reorganization after sensory deafferentation in adult macaques. Science 1991, 252: 1857–1860.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Flor H, Elbert T, Knecht S, et al.: Phantom limb pain as a perceptual correlate of massive reorganization in upper limb amputees. Nature 1995, 375: 482–484.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Muehlnickel W, Elbert T, Taub E, Flor H: Reorganization or primary auditory cortex in tinnitus. Proc Natl Acad Sci 1998, 95: 10340–20343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Elbert T, Candia B, Altenmuller E, et al.: Alteration of digital representations in somatosensory cortex in focal hand dystonia. Neuroreport 1998, 9: 3571–3575.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Elbert T, Flor H, Birbaumer N, et al.: Extensive reorganization of the somatosensory cortex in adult humans after nervous system injury. Neuroreport 1994, 5: 2593–2597.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Yang TT, Gallen C, Schwartz B, et al.: Sensory maps in the human brain. Nature 1994, 368: 592–593.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Nudo RJ, Wise BM, Sifuentes F, Milliken GW. Neural substrates for the effects of rehabilitative training on motor recovery following ischemic infarct. Science 1996, 272: 1791–1794.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Liepert J, Bauder H, Sommer M, et al.: Motor cortex plasticity during constraint-induced movement therapy in chronic stroke patients. Neurosci Lett 1998, 250: 5–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Liepert J, Bauder H, Miltner WHR, et al.: Treatment-induced massive cortical reorganization after stroke in humans. Stoke 2000, 31: 1210–1216.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Kopp B, Kunkel A, Muehlnickel W, et al.: Plasticity in the motor system related to therapy-induced improvement of movement after stroke. Neuroreport 1999, 10: 807–810.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Ostendorf CG, Wolf SL: Effect of forced use of the upper extremity of a hemiplegic patient on changes in function. Phys Ther 1981, 61: 1022–1028.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Wolf SL, Lecraw DE, Barton LA, Jann BB: Forced use of hemiplegic upper extremities to reverse the effect of learned nonuse among chronic stroke and head-injured patients. Exp Neurol 1989, 104: 125–132.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. McCulloch K, Cook EW III, Fleming WC, et al.: A reliable test of upper extremity ADL function [abstract]. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1988, 69: 755.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Kopp B, Kunkel A, Flor H, et al.: The Arm Motor Ability Test (AMAT): reliability, validity, and sensitivity to change of an instrument for assessing ADL disability. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1997, 78: 615–620.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Ware JE, Sherbourne CD: The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 1992, 30: 473–483.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Cohen J: Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. New York: Academic Press; 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Taub E, Pidikitti RD, Uswatte G, et al.: Constraint-induced (CI) movement therapy: application to lower functioning stroke patients. Neurosci Abstracts 1998, 24: 1769.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Shaw SE, Morris DM, Yakley SR, et al.: Constraint-induced movement therapy to improve upper extremity function in subjects following traumatic brain injury. Poster Presentation at American Physical Therapy Association Combined Sections Meeting. San Antonio, TX, February, 2001.

  53. Echols K, DeLuca SC, Taub E, Ramey S: Constraint-induced movement therapy in young children: a protocol and outcomes compared to traditional measures. Poster Presentation at American Physical Therapy Association Combined Sections Meeting. San Antonio, TX, February, 2001.

  54. Candia V, Elbert T, Altenmuller E, et al.: A constraint-induced movement therapy for focal hand dystonia in musicians. Lancet 1999, 42: 353.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Weiss T, Miltner WH, Adler T, et al.: Decrease in phantom limb pain associated with prothesis-induced increased use of an amputation stump. Neurosci Lett 1999, 272: 131–134.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Pulvermueller F, Genkinger B, Elbert T, et al.: Constraint-induced therapy of chronic aphasia after stroke. Stroke, in press.

  57. Taub E, Pidikitti RD, Chatterjee A, et al.: CI therapy extended from upper to lower extremity in stroke patients. Neurosci Lett 1999, 25: 320.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Taub E, Uswatte G, Mark V, et al.: CI therapy extended from stroke to spinal cord injured patients. Paper presented at Society for Neuroscience. New Orleans, LA, October, 2000.

  59. Taub E, Uswatte G, Mark V, et al.: CI therapy for lower extremities extended from CNS damage to fractured hip. Paper to be presented at the Society for Neurosciences Meeting. San Diego, CA, November, 2001.

  60. Butefisch C, Hummelsheim H, Kensler P, Mauritz KH: Repetitive training of isolated movements improves the outcome of motor rehabilitation of the centrally paretic hand. J Neurol Sci 1995, 130: 59–68.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Hesse S, Bertelt C, Schaffrin A, et al.: Restoration of gait in nonambulatory hemiparetic patients by treadmill training with partial body-weight support. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1994, 75: 1087–1093.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. Hesse S, Berelt C, Jahnke MT, et al.: Treadmill training with partial body weight support compared with physiotherapy in nonambulatory hemiparetic patients. Stroke 1995, 26: 976–981.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 1300 University Blvd., CH415, 35294-1170, Birmingham, AL, USA

    Edward Taub PhD & David M. Morris MSPT

Authors
  1. Edward Taub PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David M. Morris MSPT
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Taub, E., Morris, D.M. Constraint-induced movement therapy to enhance recovery after stroke. Curr Atheroscler Rep 3, 279–286 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11883-001-0020-0

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11883-001-0020-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation