ライフサイエンスコーパス: paretic

1 ity was moderate preoperatively (ICC = 0.693 paretic, 0.657 nonparetic) and improved postoperatively

2 (nonparetic: 8.48 degrees to 4.40 degrees ; paretic: 7.97 degrees to 7.50 degrees ), with no systema

3 recruitment of spinal motor neurons serving paretic and non-paretic intrinsic hand muscles of humans

4 oint during induced limb loading in both the paretic and non-paretic side in individuals post-stroke

5 stained up to 4 minutes and 3 minutes on the paretic and non-paretic side, respectively.

6 we characterized fascicle behaviour on both paretic and non-paretic sides during plantarflexion cont

7 ibited greater joint variability in both the paretic and nonparetic limbs in the sagittal plane durin

8 d cadence and longer step length both on the paretic and nonparetic limbs.

9 the differences in joint kinematics in both paretic and nonparetic lower limbs that can be distingui

10 The co-contraction index was higher in the paretic ankle and knee joints compared to the non-pareti

11 dition, the rate of energy absorption at the paretic ankle joint during the induced limb loading was

12 Stiffness of the paretic ankle was decreased during mid-stance when compa

13 The paretic arm after stroke exhibits different abnormalitie

14 ated with pronounced motor impairment of the paretic arm and primarily observed in non-substantially

15 iginal CIMT includes constraining of the non-paretic arm and task-oriented training.

16 in secondary motor areas ipsilateral to the paretic arm compared to controls.

17 dominant side, side of stroke, and level of paretic arm function.

18 ed use therapy, only constraining of the non-paretic arm is applied.

19 roup increased hemispheric activation during paretic arm movement (P = .03).

20 evoked potential presence was higher in the paretic arm of people with severe corticospinal tract da

21 strength of contralateral opposition in the paretic arm when the normal arm was tested.

22 ents performed reaching movements with their paretic arm with a robotic manipulandum.

23 versions also apply constraining of the non-paretic arm, but not as intensive as original CIMT.

24 icospinal tract damage compared to their non-paretic arm, people with mild corticospinal tract damage

25 r flexion or extension of the contralateral (paretic) arm.

26 force variability in controlling unilateral paretic arms after training was attributed to less power

27 t component in force control improvements in paretic arms.

28 lar stimulation facilitated force control in paretic arms.

29 ral motor evoked potentials (iMEPs) from the paretic biceps (BIC) and first dorsal interosseous (FDI)

30 The paretic biceps brachii had ~8,200 fewer serial sarcomere

31 lowing unilateral stroke, the contralateral (paretic) body side is often severely impaired, and indiv

32 Because Brown's syndrome does not involve a paretic cyclovertical muscle but rather a mechanical mus

33 Animals were then tested with their paretic/dominant forelimb.

34 chniques are effective for patients who have paretic extraocular muscles with residual function.

35 findings were: (1) Saccade amplitude in the paretic eye (PE) was smaller than that of the normal eye

36 viewing was allowed, pursuit velocity of the paretic eye during triangular-wave tracking was lower th

37 xtorsion, and (2) the vertical motion of the paretic eye increased during both torsional slow and qui

38 ty of torsional quick and slow phases of the paretic eye was less than that in the normal eye for bot

39 After surgery, the paretic eye was patched for 6 or 9 days, and then binocu

40 After surgery, the paretic eye was patched for 6 to 9 days, and then binocu

41 After the surgery, the paretic eye was patched for 6 to 9 days, and then binocu

42 n using the angle of excyclodeviation of the paretic eye, is becoming increasingly popular among stud

43 The main findings were: (1) In the paretic eye, there was an immediate and sustained rotati

44 even-stage approach to the management of the paretic eyelid complex has been described.

45 on of a gold weight to assist closure of the paretic eyelid.

46 In paretic eyes, CFP-derived DFAs were significantly higher

47 y systematically underestimate DFA values in paretic eyes.

48 ncreased grip strength of the contralesional paretic forelimb and improved motor coordination without

49 tative training improved manual skill in the paretic forelimb and induced the formation of special sy

50 e effects of training the nonparetic limb on paretic forelimb function depend upon the contralesional

51 ative training (RT) promotes improvements in paretic forelimb function that have been linked with its

52 er assessing dominant forelimb function (the paretic forelimb in rats with unilateral lesions), anima

53 ing worsened subsequent performance with the paretic forelimb, as found previously.

54 ality of the perilesion motor cortex and the paretic forelimb.

55 imb worsens deficits in the contralesional, "paretic", forelimb.

56 cantly increased only for the WBV condition [paretic: from 0.55 +/- 0.07 to 1.08 +/- 0.18 (p = 0.001)

57 5 +/- 0.07 to 1.08 +/- 0.18 (p = 0.001); non-paretic: from 0.82 +/- 0.09 to 1.01 +/- 0.13 (p < 0.001)

58 nctions, and some can still grasp with their paretic hand after hemidisconnection.

59 uggest that compensatory reliance on the non-paretic hand after stroke can shape and stabilize synapt

60 stroke patients perform motor tasks with the paretic hand and arm during cutaneous anesthesia of the

61 to a marked delay in RT in the contralateral paretic hand but not in the ipsilateral healthy hand.

62 RT delays in the paretic hand correlated well with functional recovery.

63 th changes in fMRI laterality index and with paretic hand electromyography activity.

64 JTT measured in the paretic hand improved significantly with non-invasive tr

65 ant left hand in neurotypical adults and the paretic hand in chronic stroke survivors will be more re

66 ments in motor performance of the moderately paretic hand in patients with chronic stroke, consistent

67 of generation of a voluntary movement by the paretic hand in patients with chronic subcortical stroke

68 unilateral voluntary index finger movements (paretic hand in patients, right hand in controls) in a s

69 ncrease in the size of the representation of paretic hand muscles in the ipsilesional motor cortex af

70 timulation (TMS) on motor performance of the paretic hand of chronic stroke patients and healthy cont

71 he idea that recovered motor function in the paretic hand of chronic stroke patients relies predomina

72 thy hand can influence motor function in the paretic hand of chronic stroke patients with unilateral

73 mediating recovery of motor function in the paretic hand of chronic stroke patients, but this hypoth

74 that mimic activities of daily living in the paretic hand of patients with chronic stroke, and sugges

75 r cortex could improve motor function in the paretic hand of patients with chronic stroke.

76 Finger tapping in the paretic hand was affected by TMS of the lesioned but not

77 of generation of voluntary movements by the paretic hand, a disorder correlated with the magnitude o

78 countered by overlapping experiences of the paretic hand, and might even be shifted in a cooperative

79 ralateral healthy but not in the ipsilateral paretic hand, whereas stimulation of the lesioned hemisp

80 ted clear delays in contralateral SRT in the paretic hand, whereas TMS applied to PMdIH of patients o

81 with maximal voluntary motor output from the paretic hand.

82 rehabilitation to facilitate the use of the paretic hand.

83 bsolute and relative power below 1 Hz in the paretic hand.

84 S) would result in degraded behaviour in the paretic hand.

85 of generation of a voluntary movement by the paretic hand.

86 uld result in abnormal motor behavior in the paretic hand.

87 ed side in patients who can grasp with their paretic hands indicate ipsilateral control.

88 and 5/102 patients began to grasp with their paretic hands only after the operation.

89 can only occur in patients controlling their paretic hands via ipsilateral corticospinal projections

90 d 52/102 patients could not grasp with their paretic hands.

91 with extension and flexion movements of the paretic index finger.

92 spinal motor neurons serving paretic and non-paretic intrinsic hand muscles of humans with longstandi

93 After a right hemisphere stroke, the paretic left hand neither corrects more within-trial nor

94 ctor of BBS score was the performance of the paretic leg during quiet standing with open eyes (p < 0.

95 Conversely, post-stroke paretic-leg rotary stiffness mechanisms increased by 37-

96 r tendency of avoiding bearing weight on the paretic limb during voluntary movement.

97 For example, initial attempts to move a paretic limb following stroke are associated with widesp

98 and suggests considering both nonparetic and paretic limb function, as well as bilateral coordination

99 dividuals to more fully and rapidly load the paretic limb has been developed.

100 dings highlight that postural control of the paretic limb is a key determinant of balance ability, wi

101 FES) can support functional restoration of a paretic limb post-stroke.

102 orrelated with the functional outcome of the paretic limb, as revealed in reaching performance.

103 measured during induced limb loading of the paretic limb, was associated with walking characteristic

104 ble force of contralateral opposition of the paretic limb.

105 ects on the motor system (eg, movement in a 'paretic' limb), that symptom improvement is possible, th

106 uromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) to paretic limbs has demonstrated utility for motor rehabil

107 Decreased loading of the paretic lower limb and impaired weight transfer between

108 ning/rotation was significantly decreased in paretic medial gastrocnemius (MG) muscles compared to no

109 l gastrocnemius (MG) muscles compared to non-paretic MG muscles.

110 eaningful change from no activity to some in paretic muscles.

111 e medial gastrocnemius (MG) muscle on either paretic or non-paretic side at baseline and every 1-min

112 lateral vertical ground response forces, and paretic plantar-flexor activation across all standing ta

113 After a left hemisphere stroke, the paretic right hand compensates more than the nonparetic

114 cnemius (MG) muscle on either paretic or non-paretic side at baseline and every 1-min post-interventi

115 However, the competitive edge of the non-paretic side can be countered by overlapping experiences

116 rtening and maximum fascicle rotation on the paretic side compared to the non-paretic side on our str

117 ced limb loading in both the paretic and non-paretic side in individuals post-stroke compared to heal

118 tion on the paretic side compared to the non-paretic side on our stroke survivor cohort.

119 ete with the capacity for experiences of the paretic side to do so.

120 icle rotation per fascicle shortening on the paretic side was also significantly smaller than on the

121 s also significantly smaller than on the non-paretic side, especially at plantarflexed positions.

122 aluated (treatment group, age, race, gender, paretic side, pre-stroke dominant hand, time since strok

123 minutes and 3 minutes on the paretic and non-paretic side, respectively.

124 e disorder where patients push towards their paretic side, resulting in falls.

125 e joint angle was significantly lower on the paretic side.

126 ic ankle and knee joints compared to the non-paretic side.

127 e and transferring it to the C7 nerve on the paretic side.

128 er, can limit functional improvements of the paretic side.

129 le gear ratio was significantly lower on the paretic side.

130 paretic side: 0.61 +/- 0.35, p = 0.001; non-paretic side: 0.34 +/- 0.23, p = 0.001), but not the con

131 ly for the WBV condition (absolute change on paretic side: 0.61 +/- 0.35, p = 0.001; non-paretic side

132 d during mid-stance when compared to the non-paretic side; a change independent of muscle activity.

133 d fascicle behaviour on both paretic and non-paretic sides during plantarflexion contractions at diff

134 ons between stronger TI and better levels of paretic UE function suggest a potential supportive role

135 s in the proximal and distal segments of the paretic UE.

136 tantial improvement in functional use of the paretic upper limb and quality of life 2 years after a 2

137 ficacious in promoting motor function of the paretic upper limb of stroke patients.

138 hat accompany gains in motor function of the paretic upper limb.

139 showed significantly greater cyclotorsion in paretic versus nonparetic eyes preoperatively (P = 0.001