Rest the Brain to Learn New Gait Patterns after Stroke

Background The ability to relearn a lost skill is critical to motor recovery after a stroke. Previous studies indicate that stroke typically affects the processes underlying motor control and execution but not the learning of those skills. However, these prior studies could have been confounded by the presence of significant motor impairments and/or have not focused on motor acuity tasks (i.e., tasks focusing on the quality of executed actions) that have direct functional relevance to rehabilitation.

Twenty-five participants (10 stroke; 15 controls) were recruited for this prospective, case-control study. Participants learned a novel foot-trajectory tracking task on two consecutive days while walking on a treadmill. On day 1, participants learned a new gait pattern by performing a task that necessitated greater hip and knee flexion during the swing phase of the gait. On day 2, participants repeated the task with their training leg to test retention. An average tracking error was computed to determine online and offline learning and was compared between stroke survivors and uninjured controls.

Stroke survivors were able to improve their tracking performance on the first day (p=0.033); however, the amount of learning in stroke survivors was lower in comparison with the control group on both days (p≤0.05). Interestingly, the offline gains in motor learning were higher in stroke survivors when compared with uninjured controls (p=0.011).

The results suggest that even high-functioning stroke survivors may have difficulty acquiring new motor skills related to walking, which may be related to the underlying neural damage caused at the time of stroke. Furthermore, it is likely that stroke survivors may require longer training with adequate rest to acquire new motor skills, and rehabilitation programs should target motor skill learning to improve outcomes after stroke. Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest. Funding Statement This work was partly supported by the National Institutes of Health (R41-HD111289), and the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship Program (DGE #1256260). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the funding agencies. Author Declarations I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained. Yes The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below: The Institutional Review Board of the University of Michigan Medical School (IRBMED) located at Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA, gave the Ethical Approval for this Work. I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals. Yes I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance). Yes I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable. Yes Data Availability Data will be available upon reasonable request to the corresponding author of the manuscript