ArticleBrain communications2022
Motor inhibition and its contribution to recovery of dexterous hand use after stroke.
Article in Brain communications, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Efficacy of interactive manual dexterity training after stroke: a pilot single-blinded randomized controlled trial.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2023Trial
- Beyond grip strength: selective slowing of grip force release but not initiation dynamics in a go/no-go target force-matching task.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2026Article
- Prefrontal Hierarchical Control of Corticomuscular Coherence in Stroke.IEEE transactions on neural systems and rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society · 2026Article
- Divided attention and manual visuomotor control in stroke: a combined dual-task and eye movement study.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2025Observational
- Preserved force control by the digits via minimal sparing of cortico-spinal connectivity after stroke.Experimental physiology · 2025Article
- Longitudinal brain ageing after stroke: a marker for neurodegeneration and its relevance for upper limb motor outcome.Brain communications · 2025Article
- Correlation between kinetic and kinematic measures, clinical tests and subjective self-evaluation questionnaires of the affected upper limb in people after stroke.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recovery of dexterous hand use is critical for functional outcome after stroke. Grip force recordings can inform on maximal motor output and modulatory and inhibitory cerebral functions, but how these actually contribute to recovery of dexterous hand use is unclear. This cohort study used serially assessed measures of hand kinetics to test the hypothesis that behavioural measures of motor modulation and inhibition explain dexterity recovery beyond that explained by measures of motor output alone. We also investigated the structural and functional connectivity correlates of grip force control recovery. Eighty-nine adults (median age = 54 years, 26% females) with first-ever ischaemic or haemorrhagic stroke and persistent arm and hand paresis were assessed longitudinally, at 3 weeks, and at 3 and 6 months after stroke. Kinetic measures included: maximal grip force, accuracy of precision and power grip force control, and ability to release force abruptly. Dexterous hand use was assessed clinically with the Box and Block Test and motor impairment with the upper extremity Fugl-Meyer Assessment. Structural and functional MRI was used to assess weighted corticospinal tract lesion load, voxel-based lesion symptom mapping and interhemispheric resting-state functional connectivity. Fifty-three per cent of patients had severe initial motor impairment and a majority still had residual force control impairments at 6 months. Force release at 3 weeks explained 11% additional variance of Box and Block Test outcome at 6 months, above that explained by initial scores (67%). Other kinetic measures did not explain additional variance of recovery. The predictive value of force release remained significant when controlling for corticospinal tract lesion load and clinical measures. Corticospinal tract lesion load correlated with recovery in grip force control measures. Lesions involving the parietal operculum, insular cortex, putamen and fronto-striatal tracts were also related to poorer force modulation and release. Lesions to fronto-striatal tracts explained an additional 5% of variance in force release beyond the 43% explained by corticospinal injury alone. Interhemispheric functional connectivity did not relate to force control recovery. We conclude that not only voluntary force generation but also force release (reflecting motor inhibition) are important for recovery of dexterous hand use after stroke. Although corticospinal injury is a main determinant of recovery, lesions to integrative somatosensory areas and fronto-parietal white matter (involved in motor inhibition) explain additional variance in post-stroke force release recovery. Our findings indicate that post-stroke upper limb motor impairment profiling, which is essential for targeted treatment, should consider both voluntary grasp generation and inhibition.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.