TL;DR: Findings indicate that the focus on spasticity in stroke rehabilitation is out of step with its clinical importance, and careful and continual evaluation to establish the cause of the patient’s disabilities is essential before a decision is made on the most proper rehabilitation approach.
Abstract: Background and Purpose— There is no consensus concerning the number of patients developing spasticity or the relationship between spasticity and disabilities after acute stroke. The aim of the present study was to describe the extent to which spasticity occurs and is associated with disabilities (motor impairments and activity limitations). Methods— Ninety-five patients with first-ever stroke were examined initially (mean, 5.4 days) and 3 months after stroke with the Modified Ashworth Scale for spasticity; self-reported muscle stiffness; tendon reflexes; Birgitta Lindmark motor performance; Nine Hole Peg Test for manual dexterity; Rivermead Mobility Index; Get-Up and Go test; and Barthel Index. Results— Of the 95 patients studied, 64 were hemiparetic, 18 were spastic, 6 reported muscle stiffness, and 18 had increased tendon reflexes 3 months after stroke. Patients who were nonspastic (n=77) had statistically significantly better motor and activity scores than spastic patients (n=18). However, the correlat...
TL;DR: Assessing the global distribution and prevalence of HCA and HSP by a systematic review and meta-analysis of prevalence studies found highly variable prevalence values are reported across the world, reflecting the different genetic make-up of the populations, but also methodological heterogeneity.
Abstract: Background: Hereditary cerebellar ataxias (HCA) and hereditary spastic paraplegias (HSP) are two groups of neurodegenerative disorders that usually present with p
TL;DR: In this paper, it was shown that central motor lesions are associated with loss of supraspinal drive and defective use of aff erent input with impaired behaviour of short-latency and long-latencies refl exes.
Abstract: In clinical practice, signs of exaggerated tendon tap refl exes associated with muscle hypertonia are generally thought to be responsible for spastic movement disorders. Most antispastic treatments are, therefore, directed at the reduction of refl ex activity. In recent years, however, researchers have noticed a discrepancy between spasticity as measured in the clinic and functional spastic movement disorders, which is primarily due to the diff erent roles of refl exes in passive and active states, respectively. We now know that central motor lesions are associated with loss of supraspinal drive and defective use of aff erent input with impaired behaviour of short-latency and long-latency refl exes. These changes lead to paresis and maladaptation of the movement pattern. Secondary changes in mechanical muscle fi bre, collagen tissue, and tendon properties (eg, loss of sarcomeres, subclinical contractures) result in spastic muscle tone, which in part compensates for paresis and allows functional movements on a simpler level of organisation. Antispastic drugs can accentuate paresis and therefore should be applied with caution in mobile patients.
TL;DR: Each of the three mechanisms of impairment (paresis, contracture, and spastic overactivity) is symmetrically distributed between agonists and antagonists, which generates torque imbalance around joints and limb deformities; each may be best treated focally on an individual muscle‐by‐muscle basis.
Abstract: In the subacute and chronic stages of spastic paresis, stretch-sensitive (spastic) muscle overactivity emerges as a third fundamental mechanism of motor impairment, along with paresis and soft tissue contracture. Part II of this review primarily addresses the pathophysiology of the various forms of spastic overactivity. It is argued that muscle contracture is one of the factors that cause excessive responsiveness to stretch, which in turn aggravates contracture. Excessive responsiveness to stretch also impedes voluntary motor neuron recruitment, a concept termed stretch-sensitive paresis. None of the three mechanisms of impairment (paresis, contracture, and spastic overactivity) is symmetrically distributed between agonists and antagonists, which generates torque imbalance around joints and limb deformities. Thus, each may be best treated focally on an individual muscle-by-muscle basis. Intensive motor training of the less overactive muscles should disrupt the cycle of paresis-disuse-paresis, and concomitant use of aggressive stretch and focal weakening agents in their more overactive and shortened antagonists should break the cycle of overactivity-contracture-overactivity.