RESUMO
Object manipulation depends on a refined control of grip force (GF) and load force (LF). After a brain injury, the GF control is altered in the paretic hand but what happens with the non-paretic hand is still unclear. In this study, we compared the GF control and GF-LF coordination of the non-paretic hand of 10 stroke individuals who suffered right brain damage (RBD) and 10 who suffered left brain damage (LBD), with 20 healthy individuals during lifting and oscillation task, using an instrumented object. GF was recorded with a force transducer, and LF was estimated from the object weight and acceleration. Overall, the ipsilesional hand of stroke individuals, independent of the lesion side, presented similar GF control and GF-LF coordination. However, LBD individuals took longer to start lifting the object, which may be due to the need of more time to obtain somatosensory information from the contact with the object. The findings indicate that stroke individuals preserve their ability to control and coordinate GF and LF when using their ipsilesional hand for object manipulation and the left hemisphere may play an essential role in the processing of somatosensory information needed for the GF control.
Assuntos
Força da Mão/fisiologia , Desempenho Psicomotor/fisiologia , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/fisiopatologia , Aceleração , Adulto , Idoso , Feminino , Mãos , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Suporte de CargaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Ear Acupuncture (EA) is a form of acupuncture in which needles are applied to the external ear and has been used in multiple painful conditions. Low back pain (LBP) is highly prevalent in active individuals and causes high economic burden to health systems worldwide. LBP affects the person's ability to keep balance, especially in challenging conditions. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to examine the effects of a single session of EA on pain intensity and body sway during postural tasks. METHOD: Eighty adults with LBP and pain intensity equal to or greater than 4 (0-10 scale) were randomly allocated (1:1) to EA group (EAG) or placebo group (PG). Initially, the level of pain intensity was assessed. Next, participants stood still on a force plate either with feet in parallel or in semi-tandem and with eyes open or closed. Then, the EAG was treated with EA for 20 min and the PG was treated with detuned ultrasound. After the treatment, pain intensity was assessed again and the postural test was repeated. Pain intensity was the primary outcome and center of pressure sway area and speed were the secondary outcomes measured. RESULTS: Results revealed that pain intensity decreased in both groups after treatment, but decreased more in the EAG. For postural control, no effect of treatment and no interaction between treatment and postural condition on body sway were found. CONCLUSION: Those findings indicate that EA is better than placebo to reduce pain, but neither treatment has any effect on postural control.
Assuntos
Acupuntura Auricular , Dor Lombar/fisiopatologia , Equilíbrio Postural/fisiologia , Adulto , HumanosRESUMO
ABSTRACT Background Ear Acupuncture (EA) is a form of acupuncture in which needles are applied to the external ear and has been used in multiple painful conditions. Low back pain (LBP) is highly prevalent in active individuals and causes high economic burden to health systems worldwide. LBP affects the person’s ability to keep balance, especially in challenging conditions. Objective The aim of the study was to examine the effects of a single session of EA on pain intensity and body sway during postural tasks. Method Eighty adults with LBP and pain intensity equal to or greater than 4 (0-10 scale) were randomly allocated (1:1) to EA group (EAG) or placebo group (PG). Initially, the level of pain intensity was assessed. Next, participants stood still on a force plate either with feet in parallel or in semi-tandem and with eyes open or closed. Then, the EAG was treated with EA for 20 min and the PG was treated with detuned ultrasound. After the treatment, pain intensity was assessed again and the postural test was repeated. Pain intensity was the primary outcome and center of pressure sway area and speed were the secondary outcomes measured. Results Results revealed that pain intensity decreased in both groups after treatment, but decreased more in the EAG. For postural control, no effect of treatment and no interaction between treatment and postural condition on body sway were found. Conclusion Those findings indicate that EA is better than placebo to reduce pain, but neither treatment has any effect on postural control.