The Comparison of Plantar Pressure Distribution regarding the Extent of Hemineglect in Adult Hemiplegia

성인 편마비 환자의 편측 무시정도에 따른 족저압 비교

  • Cha, Yong-Jun (Physical Therapy, Graduate School of Daegu University) ;
  • Kim, Kyung (Department of Physical Therapy, College of Rehabilitation Science, Daegu University)
  • 차용준 (대구대학교 대학원 물리치료) ;
  • 김경 (대구대학교 재활과학대학 물리치료학과)
  • Received : 2010.01.15
  • Accepted : 20100230
  • Published : 2010.02.28

Abstract

Purpose : The purpose of this study was to compare plantar pressure distribution between affected side and unaffected side and to analyze plantar pressure distribution of affected side according to the extent of hemineglect in the adult hemiplegia. Methods : Twenty-five hemiplegia participated in this study. The analysis of plantar pressure distribution was conducted by the F-scan system, and the extent of hemineglect was evaluated with line-bisection test. While the subject walked about 10 meters in their comfortable speed the plantar pressure was evaluated and stored. Results : Total contact area, AP CoP trajectory, contact pressure of mid-foot of the affected side were significantly different from the unaffected side. Total contact area, AP CoP trajectory and contact pressure of mid-foot were smaller than those of unaffected side. In the comparison among the group according to the extent of hemineglect, AP CoP trajectory of subject who has severe hemineglect was significantly different from the patient that has no hemineglect and it was shorter than that of no hemineglect. Conclusion : The plantar pressure distribution was generally different between affected side and unaffected side and the hemineglect affected negatively the patient to move CoP forwardly while walking. Accordingly, it will help the clinician to understand the hemineglect which has an effect on abnormal walking and to intervent the hemiplegia who has a neglection to the affected side.

Keywords

References

  1. 박지원, 남기석, 백미연. 편마비 보행 시 족저압력중심의 이동특성과 동적균형 능력의 상관관계 연구. 한국 전문물리치료학회지. 2005;12(1):11-21.
  2. 윤향운, 이상열, 이현민. 보행중 입각기 시 정상 성인과 편마비 환자의 환측과 건측의 족저압 분포비교. 대한물리의학회지. 2009;4(2):87-92.
  3. 장종성, 이상열, 이명희 등. 뇌졸중 환자에서 보행속도와 근 활성도 및 족저압의 상관관계. 대한물리치료학회지. 2009;21(3):47-52.
  4. Acharya, R, Tan PH, Subramaniam T, et al. Automated identification of diabetic type 2 subjects with and without neuropathy using wavelet transform on pedobarograph. J Med Syst. 2008;32 (1):21-29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10916-007-9103-y
  5. Ahroni JH, Boyko EJ, Forsberg R. Reliability of F-scan in-shoe measurements of plantar pressure. Foot Ankle Int. 1998;19(10):668-673. https://doi.org/10.1177/107110079801901004
  6. Baily MJ, Riddoch MJ, Crome P. Evaluation of a test battery for hemineglect in elderly stroke patients for use by therapists in clinical practice. NeuroRehabilitation. 2000;14(3):139-150.
  7. Beschin N, Robertson IH. Personal versus extrapersonal neglect: a group study of their dissociation using a reliable clinical test. Cortex. 1997;33:379- 384. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-9452(08)70013-3
  8. Bisiach E, Perani D, Vallar G, et al. Unilateral neglect. Neuropsychologia. 1986;24:759-767. https://doi.org/10.1016/0028-3932(86)90075-8
  9. Brandstater ME, de Bruin H, Gowland C, et al. Hemiplegic gait: analysis of temporal variables. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1983;64:583-587.
  10. Catalfamo P, Moser D, Ghoussayni S, et al. Detection of gait events using an F-Scan in-shoe pressure measurement system. Gait Posture. 2008;28(3): 420-426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2008.01.019
  11. Chen CY, Hong PW, Chen CL, et al. Ground reaction force patterns in stroke patients with various degrees of motor recovery determined by plantar dynamic analysis. Chang Gung Med J. 2007;30(1):62-72.
  12. Chen HI, Burnett MG, Hsue JT, et al. Recurrent late cerebral necrosis with aggressive characteristics after radiosurgical treatment of an arteriovenous malformation. Case report. J Neurosurg. 2006;105 (3):455-460. https://doi.org/10.3171/jns.2006.105.3.455
  13. Chevalier TL, Hodgins H, Chockalingam N. Plantar pressure measurements using an in-shoe system and a pressure platform: A comparison. Gait Posture. 2009;31(3):397-399.
  14. Chiba Y, Haga N. Analysing non-motir bias in unilateral neglect with a new variant of the line bisection task. Brain Inj. 2008;22(12):952-959. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699050802471315
  15. de Haart M, Geurts AC, Dault MC, et al. Restoration of weight-shifting capacity in patients with postacute stroke: a rehabilitation cohort study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;86(4):755-762. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2004.10.010
  16. Garrow AP, van Schie CH, Boulton AJ. Efficacy of multilayered hosiery in reducing in-shoe plantar foot pressure in high-risk patients with diabetes. Diabets Care. 2005;28(8):2001-2006. https://doi.org/10.2337/diacare.28.8.2001
  17. Ghika J, Ghika-Schmid F, Bogousslasvky J. Parietal motor syndrome: a clinical description in 32 patients in the acute phase of pure parietal strokes studied prospectively. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 1998;100 (4):271-282. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0303-8467(98)00054-7
  18. Han TR, Paik NJ, Im MS. Quantification of the path of center of pressure (COP) using an F-scan in-shoe transducer. Gait Posture. 1999;10(3):248- 254.
  19. Healton EB, Navarro C, Bressman S, et al. Subcortical neglelct. Neurology. 1982;32(7):776-778. https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.32.7.776
  20. Hillier S, Lai MS. Insole plantar pressure measurement during quiet stance post stroke. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2009;16(3):189-195. https://doi.org/10.1310/tsr1603-189
  21. Hurford P, Stringer AY, Jann B. Neuropharmacologic treatment of hemineglect: a case report comparing bromocriptine and methylphenidate. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1998;79(3):346-349. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-9993(98)90019-3
  22. Jorgensen L, Crabtree NJ, Reeve J, et al. Ambulatory level and asymmetrical weight bearing after stroke affects bone loss in the upper and lower part of the femoral neck differently: Bone adaptation after decreased mechanical loading. Bone. 2000;27(5): 701-707. https://doi.org/10.1016/S8756-3282(00)00374-4
  23. Lee B, Kang S, Park J, et al. The character-line bisection task: Anew test for hemispatial neglect. Neurology. 2002;58(3):A360.
  24. Luft AR, Weller M, [Stroke] Praxis (Bern 1994). 2009; 98(22):1285-1291. https://doi.org/10.1024/1661-8157.98.22.1285
  25. Meng ZL, Yuan WX, Kang YS. Plantar pressure distribution during barefoot and shod race walking. Journal of Biomechanics. 2007;40(Supplement 2): S534.
  26. Meyring S, Diehl RRm Milani TL, et al. Dynamic plantar pressure distribution measurements in hemiparetic patients. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 1997;12(1):60-65. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0268-0033(96)00050-2
  27. Paolucci S, Grasso MG, Antonucci G, et al. Oneyear follow-Up in stroke patients discharged from rehabilitation hospital. Cerebrovasc Dis. 2000;10 (1):25-32. https://doi.org/10.1159/000016021
  28. Patterson KK, Parafianowicz I, Danells CJ, et al. Gait asymmetry in community-ambulating stroke survivors. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2008;89(2): 304-310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2007.08.142
  29. Pedersen PM, Jorgensen HS, Nakayama H, et al. Hemineglect in acute stroke-incidence and prognostic implications. The Copenhagen Stroke Study. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 1997;76(2):122-127. https://doi.org/10.1097/00002060-199703000-00007
  30. Petrilli S, Durufle A, Nicolas B, et al. Prognostic factors in the recovery of the ability to walk after stroke. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2002;11(6):330- 335. https://doi.org/10.1053/jscd.2002.130124
  31. Pizzamiglio L, Fasotti L, Jehkonen M, et al. The use of optokinetic stimulation in rehabilitation of the hemineglect disorder. Cortex. 2004;40(3):441- 450. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-9452(08)70138-2
  32. Polanowska K, Seniow J, Paprot E, et al. Left-hand somatosensroy stimulation combined with visual scanning training in rehabilitation for post-stroke hemineglect: a randomised, double-blind study. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2009;19(3):364-382. https://doi.org/10.1080/09602010802268856
  33. Pouget A, Sejnowski TJ. A new view of hemineglect based on the response properties of parietal neurones. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 1997;352(1360):1449-1459. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.1997.0131
  34. Seo SW, Jung K, You H, et al. Motor-intentional disorders in right hemisphere stroke. Cogn Behav Neurol. 2009;22(4):242-248. https://doi.org/10.1097/WNN.0b013e3181b7f251
  35. rka-Kleiser EM, Kleiser R, Wohlschlager AM, et al. Quantitative assessment of recovery from motor hemineglect in acute stroke patients. Cerebrovasc Dis. 2006;21(5-6):307-314. https://doi.org/10.1159/000091535
  36. Stone S, Wilson B, Wroot A. The assessment of visuo-spatial neglect after stroke. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1991;54:245-250.
  37. Troisi E, Paolucci S, Silvestrini M, et al. Prognostic factors in stroke rehabilitation: the possible role of pharmacological treatment. Acta Neurol Scand. 2002;105(2):100-106.
  38. Vallar G, Guariglia C, Magnotti L, et al. Dissociation between position sense and visual-spatial components of hemineglect through a specific rehabilitation treatment. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 1997;19(5): 763-771. https://doi.org/10.1080/01688639708403758
  39. van Nes IJ, van der Linden S, Hendricks HT, et al. Is visuospatial hemineglect longitudinally associated with postural imbalance in the postacute phase of stroke? Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2009;23(8): 819-824. https://doi.org/10.1177/1545968309336148
  40. Zoltan B. Remedian of visual-perceptual and perceptualmotor deficits. Philadelphia, FA Davis Co.1990.