ライフサイエンスコーパス: paretic

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

10 t component in force control improvements in paretic arms.

11 lar stimulation facilitated force control in paretic arms.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

65 ble force of contralateral opposition of the paretic limb.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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