Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Jun;34(6):512-522.
doi: 10.1177/1545968320913554. Epub 2020 Jun 1.

Predictors of Arm Nonuse in Chronic Stroke: A Preliminary Investigation

Affiliations

Predictors of Arm Nonuse in Chronic Stroke: A Preliminary Investigation

Laurel J Buxbaum et al. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2020 Jun.

Abstract

Background. Nonuse (NU) after stroke is characterized by failure to use the contralesional arm despite adequate capacity. It has been suggested that NU is a consequence of the greater effort and/or attention required to use the affected limb, but such accounts have not been directly tested, and we have poor understanding of the predictors of NU. Objective. We aimed to provide preliminary evidence regarding demographic, neuropsychological (ie, apraxia, attention/arousal, neglect), and psychological (ie, self-efficacy) factors that may influence NU in chronic stroke. Methods. Twenty chronic stroke survivors with mild to moderate sensory-motor impairment characterized by the Upper-Extremity Fugl-Meyer (UEFM) were assessed for NU with a modified version of the Actual Amount of Use Test (AAUT), which measures the disparity between amount of use in spontaneous versus forced conditions. Participants were also assessed with measures of limb apraxia, spatial neglect, attention/arousal, and self-efficacy. Using stepwise multiple regression, we determined which variables predicted AAUT NU scores. Results. Scores on the UEFM as well as attention/arousal predicted the degree of NU (P < .05). Attention/arousal predicted NU above and beyond UEFM (P < .05). Conclusions. The results are consistent with the importance of attention and engagement necessary to fully incorporate the paretic limb into daily activities. Larger-scale studies that include additional behavioral (eg, sensation, proprioception, spasticity, pain, mental health, motivation) and neuroanatomical measures (eg, lesion volume and white matter connectivity) will be important for future investigations.

Keywords: apraxia; arm nonuse; arousal; attention; neglect; self-efficacy; stroke; upper-extremity paresis.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Relationship between nonuse (NU) in the Actual Amount of Use Test and Upper Extremity (UE) Fugl-Meyer. NU ranges from 0 to 1, where a score of 0 indicates no NU, 0.5 indicates NU for half of the items of which an individual is capable, and 1 indicates NU for all items of which they are capable. Figure quadrants are defined by median possible scores.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Raghavan P Upper limb motor impairment after stroke. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am. 2015;26:599–610. doi: 10.1016/j.pmr.2015.06.008 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Taub E, Uswatte G, Mark VW, Morris DM. The learned nonuse phenonmenon: implications for rehabilitation. Eura Medicophys. 2006;42:241–256. - PubMed
    1. Wolf SL. Revisiting constraint-induced movement therapy: are we too smitten with the mitten? Is all nonuse “learned?” and other quandaries. Phys Ther. 2007;87:1212–1223. doi:10.2522/ptj.20060355 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Waddell KJ, Strube MJ, Bailey RR, et al. Does task-specific training improve upper limb performance in daily life post-stroke? Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2017;31:290–300. doi:10.1177/1545968316680493 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Young NL, Williams JI, Yoshida KK, Bombardier C, Wright JG. The context of measuring disability: does it matter whether capability or performance is measured? J Clin Epidemiol. 1996;49:1097–1101. doi:10.1016/0895-4356(96)00214-4 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types