Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Review Article
  • Published:

Motor compensation and its effects on neural reorganization after stroke

Nature Reviews Neuroscience volume 18, pages 267–280 (2017)Cite this article

Subjects

Key Points

  • The development of compensatory movement strategies is a reliable consequence of strokes that result in motor disabilities. Obvious forms of compensation for upper-limb disability after stroke include dominant reliance on the non-paretic upper limb and the use of trunk movements, in place of distal movements, to control the paretic upper limb.

  • Converging evidence from animal and clinical studies of stroke indicate that reliance on the obvious forms of compensation described above can limit the recovery of more-normal movements and more-functional use of the paretic upper limb. Their potential to do so can be expected to vary with impairment severity.

  • By contrast, the use of relatively subtle compensatory strategies to perform skilled motor tasks with the paretic upper limb can precede the recovery of more-normal movements on those tasks. The initial reliance on compensatory strategies that approximate normal movements may enable the task practice that is needed to support the recovery of those movements.

  • Both the effects of motor rehabilitative training focused on the paretic limb and the development of compensatory movement strategies depend on learning-related neural plasticity mechanisms that can be facilitated by their interaction with early post-stroke neuroregenerative responses. As compensation starts early after stroke, its neural plasticity mechanisms are probably normally facilitated by this interaction.

  • In rodent models of stroke, the neural plasticity involved in learning to compensate with the non-paretic upper limb can compete with the neural plasticity related to rehabilitative training of the paretic forelimb. This competitive plasticity is a putative mechanism by which compensatory strategies counter functional improvements in the paretic upper limb and exacerbate its disuse.

  • Compensation is not currently receiving the prominent attention in animal models of stroke that is warranted by its reliable clinical manifestation and its potential to either promote or impede recovery. A better understanding of the neural mechanisms, and adaptive and maladaptive consequences, of behavioural compensation has a strong potential to lead to new treatments that optimize functional outcome after stroke.

Abstract

Stroke instigates a dynamic process of repair and remodelling of remaining neural circuits, and this process is shaped by behavioural experiences. The onset of motor disability simultaneously creates a powerful incentive to develop new, compensatory ways of performing daily activities. Compensatory movement strategies that are developed in response to motor impairments can be a dominant force in shaping post-stroke neural remodelling responses and can have mixed effects on functional outcome. The possibility of selectively harnessing the effects of compensatory behaviour on neural reorganization is still an insufficiently explored route for optimizing functional outcome after stroke.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: The motor cortex and its descending projection pathways are often affected by strokes that result in upper-extremity impairments.
Figure 2: Illustrations of compensatory movement strategies for upper-limb hemiparesis.
Figure 3: Different trajectories of cortical reorganization depending on forelimb behavioural experiences after motor cortical infarcts in rodent models.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Gazzaniga, M. S. Forty-five years of split-brain research and still going strong. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 6, 653–659 (2005).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bahnemann, M. et al. Compensatory eye and head movements of patients with homonymous hemianopia in the naturalistic setting of a driving simulation. J. Neurol. 262, 316–325 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Hagoort, P., Wassenaar, M. & Brown, C. Real-time semantic compensation in patients with agrammatic comprehension: electrophysiological evidence for multiple-route plasticity. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 100, 4340–4345 (2003).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Feigin, V. L. et al. Update on the global burden of ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke in 1990–2013: the GBD 2013 study. Neuroepidemiology 45, 161–176 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Feigin, V. L. et al. Global and regional burden of stroke during 1990–2010: findings from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. Lancet 383, 245–254 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Mayo, N. E. et al. Disablement following stroke. Disabil. Rehabil. 21, 258–268 (1999).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Bailey, R. R., Klaesner, J. W. & Lang, C. E. Quantifying real-world upper-limb activity in nondisabled adults and adults with chronic stroke. Neurorehabil. Neural Repair 29, 969–978 (2015). This study provides a clear demonstration, based on data from accelerometers worn on the wrists, of how dramatically stroke alters the use of the paretic and non-paretic hands.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Taub, E., Uswatte, G. & Mark, V. W. The functional significance of cortical reorganization and the parallel development of CI therapy. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 8, 396 (2014).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Nakayama, H., Jørgensen, H. S., Raaschou, H. O. & Olsen, T. S. Compensation in recovery of upper extremity function after stroke: the Copenhagen Stroke Study. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 75, 852–857 (1994).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Levin, M. F., Kleim, J. A. & Wolf, S. L. What do motor 'recovery' and 'compensation' mean in patients following stroke? Neurorehabil. Neural Repair 23, 313–319 (2009).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Jones, T. A. et al. Motor system plasticity in stroke models: intrinsically use-dependent, unreliably useful. Stroke 44, S104–S106 (2013).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Zeiler, S. R. & Krakauer, J. W. The interaction between training and plasticity in the poststroke brain. Curr. Opin. Neurol. 26, 609–616 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Allred, R. P., Kim, S. Y. & Jones, T. A. Use it and/or lose it — experience effects on brain remodeling across time after stroke. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 8, 379 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Wahl, A.-S. & Schwab, M. E. Finding an optimal rehabilitation paradigm after stroke: enhancing fiber growth and training of the brain at the right moment. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 8, 381 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Dromerick, A. W. et al. Critical periods after stroke study: translating animal stroke recovery experiments into a clinical trial. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 9, 231 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Whishaw, I. Q. Loss of the innate cortical engram for action patterns used in skilled reaching and the development of behavioral compensation following motor cortex lesions in the rat. Neuropharmacology 39, 788–805 (2000).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Krakauer, J. W. Motor learning: its relevance to stroke recovery and neurorehabilitation. Curr. Opin. Neurol. 19, 84–90 (2006).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Puig, J. et al. Decreased corticospinal tract fractional anisotropy predicts long-term motor outcome after stroke. Stroke 44, 2016–2018 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Sterr, A., Dean, P. J. A., Szameitat, A. J., Conforto, A. B. & Shen, S. Corticospinal tract integrity and lesion volume play different roles in chronic hemiparesis and its improvement through motor practice. Neurorehabil. Neural Repair 28, 335–343 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Latash, M. L. Progress in Motor Control: Structure–Function Relations in Voluntary Movements (Human Kinetics, 2002).

    Google Scholar 

  21. Twitchell, T. E. The restoration of motor function following hemiplegia in man. Brain J. Neurol. 74, 443–480 (1951).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. McCrea, P. H., Eng, J. J. & Hodgson, A. J. Saturated muscle activation contributes to compensatory reaching strategies after stroke. J. Neurophysiol. 94, 2999–3008 (2005).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Wagner, J. M., Dromerick, A. W., Sahrmann, S. A. & Lang, C. E. Upper extremity muscle activation during recovery of reaching in subjects with post-stroke hemiparesis. Clin. Neurophysiol. 118, 164–176 (2007).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Roh, J., Rymer, W. Z., Perreault, E. J., Yoo, S. B. & Beer, R. F. Alterations in upper limb muscle synergy structure in chronic stroke survivors. J. Neurophysiol. 109, 768–781 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Roby-Brami, A., Fuchs, S., Mokhtari, M. & Bussel, B. Reaching and grasping strategies in hemiparetic patients. Motor Control 1, 72–91 (1997).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Lang, C. E. et al. Deficits in grasp versus reach during acute hemiparesis. Exp. Brain Res. 166, 126–136 (2005).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Nowak, D. A. The impact of stroke on the performance of grasping: usefulness of kinetic and kinematic motion analysis. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 32, 1439–1450 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Alt Murphy, M., Willén, C. & Sunnerhagen, K. S. Responsiveness of upper extremity kinematic measures and clinical improvement during the first three months after stroke. Neurorehabil. Neural Repair 27, 844–853 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. van Dokkum, L. et al. The contribution of kinematics in the assessment of upper limb motor recovery early after stroke. Neurorehabil. Neural Repair 28, 4–12 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Foroud, A. & Whishaw, I. Q. Reaching-to-eat in humans post-stroke: fluctuating components within a constant pattern. Behav. Neurosci. 124, 851–867 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Nowak, D. A. et al. Dexterity is impaired at both hands following unilateral subcortical middle cerebral artery stroke. Eur. J. Neurosci. 25, 3173–3184 (2007).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Kaeser, M. et al. Effects of unilateral motor cortex lesion on ipsilesional hand's reach and grasp performance in monkeys: relationship with recovery in the contralesional hand. J. Neurophysiol. 103, 1630–1645 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Bowden, J. L., Taylor, J. L. & McNulty, P. A. Voluntary activation is reduced in both the more- and less-affected upper limbs after unilateral stroke. Front. Neurol. 5, 239 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Stewart, J. C., Gordon, J. & Winstein, C. J. Control of reach extent with the paretic and nonparetic arms after unilateral sensorimotor stroke II: planning and adjustments to control movement distance. Exp. Brain Res. 232, 3431–3443 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Nielsen, J. B., Crone, C. & Hultborn, H. The spinal pathophysiology of spasticity — from a basic science point of view. Acta Physiol. (Oxf.) 189, 171–180 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Levin, M. F., Selles, R. W., Verheul, M. H. & Meijer, O. G. Deficits in the coordination of agonist and antagonist muscles in stroke patients: implications for normal motor control. Brain Res. 853, 352–369 (2000).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Torre, K. et al. Somatosensory-related limitations for bimanual coordination after stroke. Neurorehabil. Neural Repair 27, 507–515 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Borich, M. R., Brodie, S. M., Gray, W. A., Ionta, S. & Boyd, L. A. Understanding the role of the primary somatosensory cortex: opportunities for rehabilitation. Neuropsychologia 79, 246–255 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Meyer, S. et al. Voxel-based lesion-symptom mapping of stroke lesions underlying somatosensory deficits. Neuroimage Clin. 10, 257–266 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Cheung, V. C. K. et al. Muscle synergy patterns as physiological markers of motor cortical damage. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109, 14652–14656 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Lee, S. W., Triandafilou, K., Lock, B. A. & Kamper, D. G. Impairment in task-specific modulation of muscle coordination correlates with the severity of hand impairment following stroke. PLoS ONE 8, e68745 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Cirstea, M. C. & Levin, M. F. Compensatory strategies for reaching in stroke. Brain 123, 940–953 (2000).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Levin, M. F., Michaelsen, S. M., Cirstea, C. M. & Roby-Brami, A. Use of the trunk for reaching targets placed within and beyond the reach in adult hemiparesis. Exp. Brain Res. 143, 171–180 (2002).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Buma, F., Kwakkel, G. & Ramsey, N. Understanding upper limb recovery after stroke. Restor. Neurol. Neurosci. 31, 707–722 (2013).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Shaikh, T., Goussev, V., Feldman, A. G. & Levin, M. F. Arm–trunk coordination for beyond-the-reach movements in adults with stroke. Neurorehabil. Neural Repair 28, 355–366 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Michaelsen, S. M., Jacobs, S., Roby-Brami, A. & Levin, M. F. Compensation for distal impairments of grasping in adults with hemiparesis. Exp. Brain Res. 157, 162–173 (2004).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Levin, M. F., Liebermann, D. G., Parmet, Y. & Berman, S. Compensatory versus noncompensatory shoulder movements used for reaching in stroke. Neurorehabil. Neural Repair 30, 635–646 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Kwakkel, G., Kollen, B. & Lindeman, E. Understanding the pattern of functional recovery after stroke: facts and theories. Restor. Neurol. Neurosci. 22, 281–299 (2004).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Latash, M. L. Motor synergies and the equilibrium-point hypothesis. Motor Control 14, 294–322 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  50. Lang, C. E., Wagner, J. M., Edwards, D. F., Sahrmann, S. A. & Dromerick, A. W. Recovery of grasp versus reach in people with hemiparesis poststroke. Neurorehabil. Neural Repair 20, 444–454 (2006).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Raghavan, P., Santello, M., Gordon, A. M. & Krakauer, J. W. Compensatory motor control after stroke: an alternative joint strategy for object-dependent shaping of hand posture. J. Neurophysiol. 103, 3034–3043 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  52. Tretriluxana, J., Gordon, J., Fisher, B. E. & Winstein, C. J. Hemisphere specific impairments in reach-to-grasp control after stroke: effects of object size. Neurorehabil. Neural Repair 23, 679–691 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Schaefer, S. Y., DeJong, S. L., Cherry, K. M. & Lang, C. E. Grip type and task goal modify reach-to-grasp performance in post-stroke hemiparesis. Motor Control 16, 245–264 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  54. Sterr, A., Freivogel, S. & Schmalohr, D. Neurobehavioral aspects of recovery: assessment of the learned nonuse phenomenon in hemiparetic adolescents. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 83, 1726–1731 (2002).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Han, C. E. et al. Quantifying arm nonuse in individuals poststroke. Neurorehabil. Neural Repair 27, 439–447 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  56. Rinehart, J. K., Singleton, R. D., Adair, J. C., Sadek, J. R. & Haaland, K. Y. Arm use after left or right hemiparesis is influenced by hand preference. Stroke 40, 545–550 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Haaland, K. Y. et al. Relationship between arm usage and instrumental activities of daily living after unilateral stroke. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 93, 1957–1962 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Dickstein, R., Heffes, Y., Laufer, Y. & Ben-Haim, Z. Activation of selected trunk muscles during symmetric functional activities in poststroke hemiparetic and hemiplegic patients. J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry 66, 218–221 (1999).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  59. Carr, L. J., Harrison, L. M. & Stephens, J. A. Evidence for bilateral innervation of certain homologous motoneurone pools in man. J. Physiol. 475, 217–227 (1994).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  60. Rossi, E., Mitnitski, A. & Feldman, A. G. Sequential control signals determine arm and trunk contributions to hand transport during reaching in humans. J. Physiol. 538, 659–671 (2002).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  61. Whishaw, I. Q., Pellis, S. M. & Gorny, B. P. Skilled reaching in rats and humans: evidence for parallel development or homology. Behav. Brain Res. 47, 59–70 (1992).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Sacrey, L.-A. R., Alaverdashvili, M. & Whishaw, I. Q. Similar hand shaping in reaching-for-food (skilled reaching) in rats and humans provides evidence of homology in release, collection, and manipulation movements. Behav. Brain Res. 204, 153–161 (2009). This study establishes that there are major homologies between humans and rats in the upper-limb movements used in reach-to-grasp tasks.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Whishaw, I. Q., Pellis, S. M., Gorny, B. P. & Pellis, V. C. The impairments in reaching and the movements of compensation in rats with motor cortex lesions: an endpoint, videorecording, and movement notation analysis. Behav. Brain Res. 42, 77–91 (1991).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Whishaw, I. Q., Gorny, B. & Sarna, J. Paw and limb use in skilled and spontaneous reaching after pyramidal tract, red nucleus and combined lesions in the rat: behavioral and anatomical dissociations. Behav. Brain Res. 93, 167–183 (1998).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Braun, R. G., Andrews, E. M. & Kartje, G. L. Kinematic analysis of motor recovery with human adult bone marrow-derived somatic cell therapy in a rat model of stroke. Neurorehabil. Neural Repair 26, 898–906 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Klein, A., Sacrey, L.-A. R., Whishaw, I. Q. & Dunnett, S. B. The use of rodent skilled reaching as a translational model for investigating brain damage and disease. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 36, 1030–1042 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Alaverdashvili, M., Foroud, A., Lim, D. H. & Whishaw, I. Q. “Learned baduse” limits recovery of skilled reaching for food after forelimb motor cortex stroke in rats: a new analysis of the effect of gestures on success. Behav. Brain Res. 188, 281–290 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Lai, S. et al. Quantitative kinematic characterization of reaching impairments in mice after a stroke. Neurorehabil. Neural Repair 29, 382–392 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Metz, G. A., Antonow-Schlorke, I. & Witte, O. W. Motor improvements after focal cortical ischemia in adult rats are mediated by compensatory mechanisms. Behav. Brain Res. 162, 71–82 (2005).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Whishaw, I. Q. & Coles, B. L. Varieties of paw and digit movement during spontaneous food handling in rats: postures, bimanual coordination, preferences, and the effect of forelimb cortex lesions. Behav. Brain Res. 77, 135–148 (1996).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Allred, R. P. et al. The vermicelli handling test: a simple quantitative measure of dexterous forepaw function in rats. J. Neurosci. Methods 170, 229–244 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  72. Jones, T. A. & Schallert, T. Use-dependent growth of pyramidal neurons after neocortical damage. J. Neurosci. 14, 2140–2152 (1994).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  73. Friel, K. M. & Nudo, R. J. Recovery of motor function after focal cortical injury in primates: compensatory movement patterns used during rehabilitative training. Somatosens. Mot. Res. 15, 173–189 (1998).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Plautz, E. J., Milliken, G. W. & Nudo, R. J. Effects of repetitive motor training on movement representations in adult squirrel monkeys: role of use versus learning. Neurobiol. Learn. Mem. 74, 27–55 (2000).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Murata, Y. et al. Effects of motor training on the recovery of manual dexterity after primary motor cortex lesion in macaque monkeys. J. Neurophysiol. 99, 773–786 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Moore, T. L. et al. Recovery from ischemia in the middle-aged brain: a nonhuman primate model. Neurobiol. Aging 33, 619.e9–619.e24 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Murata, Y. & Higo, N. Development and characterization of a macaque model of focal internal capsular infarcts. PLoS ONE 11, e0154752 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  78. Stanley, J. & Krakauer, J. W. Motor skill depends on knowledge of facts. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 7, 503 (2013).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  79. Knapp, H. D., Taub, E. & Berman, A. J. Movements in monkeys with deafferented forelimbs. Exp. Neurol. 7, 305–315 (1963).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Peterson, G. M. Mechanisms of Handedness in the Rat (Johns Hopkins Press, 1934).

    Google Scholar 

  81. Döbrössy, M. D. & Dunnett, S. B. The effects of lateralized training on spontaneous forelimb preference, lesion deficits, and graft-mediated functional recovery after unilateral striatal lesions in rats. Exp. Neurol. 199, 373–383 (2006).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Erickson, C. A., Gharbawie, O. A. & Whishaw, I. Q. Attempt-dependent decrease in skilled reaching characterizes the acute postsurgical period following a forelimb motor cortex lesion: an experimental demonstration of learned nonuse in the rat. Behav. Brain Res. 179, 208–218 (2007).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Michaelsen, S. M., Dannenbaum, R. & Levin, M. F. Task-specific training with trunk restraint on arm recovery in stroke: randomized control trial. Stroke 37, 186–192 (2006). This study finds that training stroke survivors who have moderate impairments on a reaching task while the trunk is restrained increases the range of elbow movement, whereas training without trunk restraint decreases it and instead promotes a greater reliance on trunk movement for arm extension.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Subramanian, S. K., Yamanaka, J., Chilingaryan, G. & Levin, M. F. Validity of movement pattern kinematics as measures of arm motor impairment poststroke. Stroke 41, 2303–2308 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Cirstea, C. M., Ptito, A. & Levin, M. F. Feedback and cognition in arm motor skill reacquisition after stroke. Stroke 37, 1237–1242 (2006).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Lum, P. S. et al. Gains in upper extremity function after stroke via recovery or compensation: potential differential effects on amount of real-world limb use. Top. Stroke Rehabil. 16, 237–253 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Poole, J. L., Sadek, J. & Haaland, K. Y. Ipsilateral deficits in 1-handed shoe tying after left or right hemisphere stroke. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 90, 1800–1805 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Walker, C. M., Walker, M. F. & Sunderland, A. Dressing after a stroke: a survey of current occupational therapy practice. Br. J. Occup. Ther. 66, 263–268 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  89. Kitago, T. et al. Improvement after constraint-induced movement therapy recovery of normal motor control or task-specific compensation? Neurorehabil. Neural Repair 27, 99–109 (2013). Findings from this study indicate that compensation underlies the improvements in paretic upper-limb function that result from CIMT.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Wu, C., Chen, C., Tang, S. F., Lin, K. & Huang, Y. Kinematic and clinical analyses of upper-extremity movements after constraint-induced movement therapy in patients with stroke: a randomized controlled trial. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 88, 964–970 (2007).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Caimmi, M. et al. Using kinematic analysis to evaluate constraint-induced movement therapy in chronic stroke patients. Neurorehabil. Neural Repair 22, 31–39 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Massie, C., Malcolm, M. P., Greene, D. & Thaut, M. The effects of constraint-induced therapy on kinematic outcomes and compensatory movement patterns: an exploratory study. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 90, 571–579 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Alaverdashvili, M. & Whishaw, I. Q. A behavioral method for identifying recovery and compensation: hand use in a preclinical stroke model using the single pellet reaching task. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 37, 950–967 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. O'Bryant, A. J. et al. Enduring poststroke motor functional improvements by a well-timed combination of motor rehabilitative training and cortical stimulation in rats. Neurorehabil. Neural Repair 30, 143–154 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Moon, S.-K., Alaverdashvili, M., Cross, A. R. & Whishaw, I. Q. Both compensation and recovery of skilled reaching following small photothrombotic stroke to motor cortex in the rat. Exp. Neurol. 218, 145–153 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  96. Murata, Y. et al. Temporal plasticity involved in recovery from manual dexterity deficit after motor cortex lesion in macaque monkeys. J. Neurosci. 35, 84–95 (2015). Findings from this study indicate that, over the course of training in a fine motor skills task, the use of compensatory movement strategies can be a stage that precedes the recovery of more-normal movements.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  97. Starkey, M. L. et al. Back seat driving: hindlimb corticospinal neurons assume forelimb control following ischaemic stroke. Brain 135, 3265–3281 (2012). This study finds that training-induced motor performance improvements after infarcts of the forelimb region of the motor cortex in rats depend on the reorganization of the corticospinal projections of surviving neurons of the ipsilesional motor cortex (also see reference 172).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Liu, Z., Zhang, R. L., Li, Y., Cui, Y. & Chopp, M. Remodeling of the corticospinal innervation and spontaneous behavioral recovery after ischemic stroke in adult mice. Stroke 40, 2546–2551 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  99. Carmichael, S. T., Kathirvelu, B., Schweppe, C. A. & Nie, E. H. Molecular, cellular and functional events in axonal sprouting after stroke. Exp. Neurol. 287, 384–394 (2017).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  100. Cheng, H. W. et al. Differential spine loss and regrowth of striatal neurons following multiple forms of deafferentation: a Golgi study. Exp. Neurol. 147, 287–298 (1997).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  101. Adkins, D. L., Bury, S. D. & Jones, T. A. Laminar-dependent dendritic spine alterations in the motor cortex of adult rats following callosal transection and forced forelimb use. Neurobiol. Learn. Mem. 78, 35–52 (2002).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  102. Vuksic, M. et al. Unilateral entorhinal denervation leads to long-lasting dendritic alterations of mouse hippocampal granule cells. Exp. Neurol. 230, 176–185 (2011).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  103. Muramatsu, R. et al. Angiogenesis induced by CNS inflammation promotes neuronal remodeling through vessel-derived prostacyclin. Nat. Med. 18, 1658–1664 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  104. Hermann, D. M., Buga, A.-M. & Popa-Wagner, A. Neurovascular remodeling in the aged ischemic brain. J. Neural Transm. (Vienna) 122 (Suppl. 1), S25–S33 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  105. Murphy, T. H. & Corbett, D. Plasticity during stroke recovery: from synapse to behaviour. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 10, 861–872 (2009).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  106. Jones, T. A. & Adkins, D. L. Motor system reorganization after stroke: stimulating and training toward perfection. Physiology (Bethesda) 30, 358–370 (2015).

    CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  107. Hinman, J. D. The back and forth of axonal injury and repair after stroke. Curr. Opin. Neurol. 27, 615–623 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  108. Krakauer, J. W., Carmichael, S. T., Corbett, D. & Wittenberg, G. F. Getting neurorehabilitation right: what can be learned from animal models? Neurorehabil. Neural Repair 26, 923–931 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  109. Manganotti, P., Acler, M., Zanette, G. P., Smania, N. & Fiaschi, A. Motor cortical disinhibition during early and late recovery after stroke. Neurorehabil. Neural Repair 22, 396–403 (2008).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  110. Hummel, F. C. et al. Deficient intracortical inhibition (SICI) during movement preparation after chronic stroke. Neurology 72, 1766–1772 (2009).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  111. Carmichael, S. T. Brain excitability in stroke: the yin and yang of stroke progression. Arch. Neurol. 69, 161–167 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  112. Dijkhuizen, R. M. et al. Correlation between brain reorganization, ischemic damage, and neurologic status after transient focal cerebral ischemia in rats: a functional magnetic resonance imaging study. J. Neurosci. 23, 510–517 (2003).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  113. Grefkes, C. & Ward, N. S. Cortical reorganization after stroke: how much and how functional? Neuroscientist 20, 56–70 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  114. Overman, J. J. et al. A role for ephrin-A5 in axonal sprouting, recovery, and activity-dependent plasticity after stroke. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109, E2230–E2239 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  115. Ishida, A. et al. Causal link between the cortico-rubral pathway and functional recovery through forced impaired limb use in rats with stroke. J. Neurosci. 36, 455–467 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  116. Kim, S. Y. et al. Experience with the 'good' limb induces aberrant synaptic plasticity in the perilesion cortex after stroke. J. Neurosci. 35, 8604–8610 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  117. Wang, L., Conner, J. M., Nagahara, A. H. & Tuszynski, M. H. Rehabilitation drives enhancement of neuronal structure in functionally relevant neuronal subsets. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, 2750–2755 (2016). This article provides an excellent example of the major neuronal structural changes in ipsilesional cortex that can result from motor skill training focused on the paretic forelimb, as examined in rats.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  118. Bury, S. D., Eichhorn, A. C., Kotzer, C. M. & Jones, T. A. Reactive astrocytic responses to denervation in the motor cortex of adult rats are sensitive to manipulations of behavioral experience. Neuropharmacology 39, 743–755 (2000).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  119. Brus-Ramer, M., Carmel, J. B., Chakrabarty, S. & Martin, J. H. Electrical stimulation of spared corticospinal axons augments connections with ipsilateral spinal motor circuits after injury. J. Neurosci. 27, 13793–13801 (2007).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  120. Friel, K. M. & Martin, J. H. Bilateral activity-dependent interactions in the developing corticospinal system. J. Neurosci. 27, 11083–11090 (2007).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  121. Jiang, Y.-Q., Zaaimi, B. & Martin, J. H. Competition with primary sensory afferents drives remodeling of corticospinal axons in mature spinal motor circuits. J. Neurosci. 36, 193–203 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  122. Theodosis, D. T., Poulain, D. A. & Oliet, S. H. R. Activity-dependent structural and functional plasticity of astrocyte–neuron interactions. Physiol. Rev. 88, 983–1008 (2008).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  123. Perez-Alvarez, A., Navarrete, M., Covelo, A., Martin, E. D. & Araque, A. Structural and functional plasticity of astrocyte processes and dendritic spine interactions. J. Neurosci. 34, 12738–12744 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  124. Lacoste, B. et al. Sensory-related neural activity regulates the structure of vascular networks in the cerebral cortex. Neuron 83, 1117–1130 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  125. Jones, T. A. Multiple synapse formation in the motor cortex opposite unilateral sensorimotor cortex lesions in adult rats. J. Comp. Neurol. 414, 57–66 (1999).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  126. Jones, T. A. & Jefferson, S. C. Reflections of experience-expectant development in repair of the adult damaged brain. Dev. Psychobiol. 53, 466–475 (2011).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  127. Bury, S. D. et al. Denervation facilitates neuronal growth in the motor cortex of rats in the presence of behavioral demand. Neurosci. Lett. 287, 85–88 (2000).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  128. Bury, S. D. & Jones, T. A. Unilateral sensorimotor cortex lesions in adult rats facilitate motor skill learning with the 'unaffected' forelimb and training-induced dendritic structural plasticity in the motor cortex. J. Neurosci. 22, 8597–8606 (2002).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  129. Hsu, J. E. & Jones, T. A. Contralesional neural plasticity and functional changes in the less-affected forelimb after large and small cortical infarcts in rats. Exp. Neurol. 201, 479–494 (2006).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  130. Nudo, R. J., Wise, B. M., SiFuentes, F. & Milliken, G. W. Neural substrates for the effects of rehabilitative training on motor recovery after ischemic infarct. Science 272, 1791–1794 (1996).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  131. Conner, J. M., Chiba, A. A. & Tuszynski, M. H. The basal forebrain cholinergic system is essential for cortical plasticity and functional recovery following brain injury. Neuron 46, 173–179 (2005).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  132. Nishibe, M., Urban, E. T. R., Barbay, S. & Nudo, R. J. Rehabilitative training promotes rapid motor recovery but delayed motor map reorganization in a rat cortical ischemic infarct model. Neurorehabil. Neural Repair 29, 472–482 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  133. Tennant, K. A. et al. Age-dependent reorganization of peri-infarct 'premotor' cortex with task-specific rehabilitative training in mice. Neurorehabil. Neural Repair 29, 193–202 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  134. Liepert, J. et al. Treatment-induced cortical reorganization after stroke in humans. Stroke 31, 1210–1216 (2000).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  135. Sawaki, L. et al. Constraint-induced movement therapy results in increased motor map area in subjects 3 to 9 months after stroke. Neurorehabil. Neural Repair 22, 505–513 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  136. Biernaskie, J., Chernenko, G. & Corbett, D. Efficacy of rehabilitative experience declines with time after focal ischemic brain injury. J. Neurosci. 24, 1245–1254 (2004).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  137. Lang, K. C., Thompson, P. A. & Wolf, S. L. The EXCITE Trial: reacquiring upper-extremity task performance with early versus late delivery of constraint therapy. Neurorehabil. Neural Repair 27, 654–663 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  138. Zeiler, S. R. et al. Paradoxical motor recovery from a first stroke after induction of a second stroke: reopening a postischemic sensitive period. Neurorehabil. Neural Repair 30, 794–800 (2016). This study in a mouse model provides particularly compelling support for the idea that there is a period after stroke during which there is increased sensitivity to the effects of rehabilitative training on paretic forelimb performance.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  139. Barbay, S. et al. Behavioral and neurophysiological effects of delayed training following a small ischemic infarct in primary motor cortex of squirrel monkeys. Exp. Brain Res. 169, 106–116 (2006).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  140. Palmér, T., Tamtè, M., Halje, P., Enqvist, O. & Petersson, P. A system for automated tracking of motor components in neurophysiological research. J. Neurosci. Methods 205, 334–344 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  141. Lambercy, O. et al. Sub-processes of motor learning revealed by a robotic manipulandum for rodents. Behav. Brain Res. 278, 569–576 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  142. Michaelsen, S. M., Luta, A., Roby-Brami, A. & Levin, M. F. Effect of trunk restraint on the recovery of reaching movements in hemiparetic patients. Stroke 32, 1875–1883 (2001).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  143. Dromerick, A. W. et al. Relationships between upper-limb functional limitation and self-reported disability 3 months after stroke. J. Rehabil. Res. Dev. 43, 401–408 (2006).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  144. Allred, R. P., Maldonado, M. A., Hsu, J. E. & Jones, T. A. Training the 'less-affected' forelimb after unilateral cortical infarcts interferes with functional recovery of the impaired forelimb in rats. Restor. Neurol. Neurosci. 23, 297–302 (2005).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  145. Allred, R. P. & Jones, T. A. Maladaptive effects of learning with the less-affected forelimb after focal cortical infarcts in rats. Exp. Neurol. 210, 172–181 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  146. Kerr, A. L., Wolke, M. L., Bell, J. A. & Jones, T. A. Post-stroke protection from maladaptive effects of learning with the non-paretic forelimb by bimanual home cage experience in C57BL/6 mice. Behav. Brain Res. 252, 180–187 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  147. Kerr, A. L., Cheffer, K. A., Curtis, M. C. & Rodriguez, A. Long-term deficits of the paretic limb follow post-stroke compensatory limb use in C57BL/6 mice. Behav. Brain Res. 303, 103–108 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  148. MacLellan, C. L., Langdon, K. D., Botsford, A., Butt, S. & Corbett, D. A model of persistent learned nonuse following focal ischemia in rats. Neurorehabil. Neural Repair 27, 900–907 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  149. Xu, T. et al. Rapid formation and selective stabilization of synapses for enduring motor memories. Nature 462, 915–919 (2009).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  150. Jones, T. A., Chu, C. J., Grande, L. A. & Gregory, A. D. Motor skills training enhances lesion-induced structural plasticity in the motor cortex of adult rats. J. Neurosci. 19, 10153–10163 (1999).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  151. Kleim, J. A. et al. Motor learning-dependent synaptogenesis is localized to functionally reorganized motor cortex. Neurobiol. Learn. Mem. 77, 63–77 (2002).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  152. Ganeshina, O., Berry, R. W., Petralia, R. S., Nicholson, D. A. & Geinisman, Y. Synapses with a segmented, completely partitioned postsynaptic density express more AMPA receptors than other axospinous synaptic junctions. Neuroscience 125, 615–623 (2004).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  153. Lee, K. J. et al. Motor skill training induces coordinated strengthening and weakening between neighboring synapses. J. Neurosci. 33, 9794–9799 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  154. Allred, R. P., Cappellini, C. H. & Jones, T. A. The 'good' limb makes the 'bad' limb worse: experience-dependent interhemispheric disruption of functional outcome after cortical infarcts in rats. Behav. Neurosci. 124, 124–132 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  155. Hummel, F. C. & Cohen, L. G. Non-invasive brain stimulation: a new strategy to improve neurorehabilitation after stroke? Lancet Neurol. 5, 708–712 (2006).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  156. Bütefisch, C. M., Kleiser, R. & Seitz, R. J. Post-lesional cerebral reorganisation: evidence from functional neuroimaging and transcranial magnetic stimulation. J. Physiol. Paris 99, 437–454 (2006).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  157. Jankowska, E. & Edgley, S. A. How can corticospinal tract neurons contribute to ipsilateral movements? A question with implications for recovery of motor functions. Neuroscientist 12, 67–79 (2006).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  158. Bradnam, L. V., Stinear, C. M. & Byblow, W. D. Ipsilateral motor pathways after stroke: implications for non-invasive brain stimulation. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 7, 184 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  159. Dancause, N., Touvykine, B. & Mansoori, B. K. Inhibition of the contralesional hemisphere after stroke: reviewing a few of the building blocks with a focus on animal models. Prog. Brain Res. 218, 361–387 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  160. Murase, N., Duque, J., Mazzocchio, R. & Cohen, L. G. Influence of interhemispheric interactions on motor function in chronic stroke. Ann. Neurol. 55, 400–409 (2004).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  161. Harris-Love, M. L., Chan, E., Dromerick, A. W. & Cohen, L. G. Neural substrates of motor recovery in severely impaired stroke patients with hand paralysis. Neurorehabil. Neural Repair 30, 328–338 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  162. Fregni, F. et al. Transcranial direct current stimulation of the unaffected hemisphere in stroke patients. Neuroreport 16, 1551–1555 (2005).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  163. Nowak, D. A. et al. Effects of low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation of the contralesional primary motor cortex on movement kinematics and neural activity in subcortical stroke. Arch. Neurol. 65, 741–747 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  164. Grefkes, C. et al. Modulating cortical connectivity in stroke patients by rTMS assessed with fMRI and dynamic causal modeling. Neuroimage 50, 233–242 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  165. Bradnam, L. V., Stinear, C. M., Barber, P. A. & Byblow, W. D. Contralesional hemisphere control of the proximal paretic upper limb following stroke. Cereb. Cortex 22, 2662–2671 (2012). The findings of this study strongly indicate that the influence of the contralesional cortex on paretic limb function in chronic stroke varies with impairment severity and corticospinal tract integrity.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  166. Talelli, P. et al. Theta burst stimulation in the rehabilitation of the upper limb: a semirandomized, placebo-controlled trial in chronic stroke patients. Neurorehabil. Neural Repair 26, 976–987 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  167. Mohapatra, S. et al. Role of contralesional hemisphere in paretic arm reaching in patients with severe arm paresis due to stroke: a preliminary report. Neurosci. Lett. 617, 52–58 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  168. Lotze, M. et al. The role of multiple contralesional motor areas for complex hand movements after internal capsular lesion. J. Neurosci. 26, 6096–6102 (2006).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  169. Biernaskie, J., Szymanska, A., Windle, V. & Corbett, D. Bi-hemispheric contribution to functional motor recovery of the affected forelimb following focal ischemic brain injury in rats. Eur. J. Neurosci. 21, 989–999 (2005).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  170. Shanina, E. V., Schallert, T., Witte, O. W. & Redecker, C. Behavioral recovery from unilateral photothrombotic infarcts of the forelimb sensorimotor cortex in rats: role of the contralateral cortex. Neuroscience 139, 1495–1506 (2006).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  171. O'Bryant, A., Bernier, B. & Jones, T. A. Abnormalities in skilled reaching movements are improved by peripheral anesthetization of the less-affected forelimb after sensorimotor cortical infarcts in rats. Behav. Brain Res. 177, 298–307 (2007).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  172. Lindau, N. T. et al. Rewiring of the corticospinal tract in the adult rat after unilateral stroke and anti-Nogo-A therapy. Brain 137, 739–756 (2014). This study provides compelling evidence that axonal sprouting from contralesional corticospinal neurons can contribute to motor training-dependent improvements in paretic forelimb performance and recovery, as examined in rats with large motor cortical infarcts.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  173. Ueno, M., Hayano, Y., Nakagawa, H. & Yamashita, T. Intraspinal rewiring of the corticospinal tract requires target-derived brain-derived neurotrophic factor and compensates lost function after brain injury. Brain 135, 1253–1267 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  174. Tanaka, T., Fujita, Y., Ueno, M., Shultz, L. D. & Yamashita, T. Suppression of SHP-1 promotes corticospinal tract sprouting and functional recovery after brain injury. Cell Death Dis. 4, e567 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  175. Morecraft, R. J. et al. Frontal and frontoparietal injury differentially affect the ipsilateral corticospinal projection from the nonlesioned hemisphere in monkey (Macaca mulatta). J. Comp. Neurol. 524, 380–407 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  176. Harris-Love, M. L., Chen, E. Dromerick, A. W. & Cohen, L. G. Neural substrates of motor recovery in severely impaired stroke patients with hand paralysis. Neurorehabil. Neural Repair 30, 328–338 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  177. Hodics, T., Cohen, L. G. & Cramer, S. C. Functional imaging of intervention effects in stroke motor rehabilitation. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 87, S36–S42 (2006).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  178. Hubbard, I. J. et al. A randomized controlled trial of the effect of early upper-limb training on stroke recovery and brain activation. Neurorehabil. Neural Repair 29, 703–713 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  179. Harris-Love, M. L., Morton, S. M., Perez, M. A. & Cohen, L. G. Mechanisms of short-term training-induced reaching improvement in severely hemiparetic stroke patients: a TMS study. Neurorehabil. Neural Repair 25, 398–411 (2011).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  180. Lee, M. Y. et al. Cortical activation pattern of compensatory movement in stroke patients. NeuroRehabilitation 25, 255–260 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  181. Byblow, W. D., Stinear, C. M., Barber, P. A., Petoe, M. A. & Ackerley, S. J. Proportional recovery after stroke depends on corticomotor integrity. Ann. Neurol. 78, 848–859 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  182. Feeney, D. M. & Baron, J. C. Diaschisis. Stroke 17, 817–830 (1986).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  183. Cho, J. et al. Remodeling of neuronal circuits after reach training in chronic capsular stroke. Neurorehabil. Neural Repair 30, 941–950 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  184. Ergul, A., Alhusban, A. & Fagan, S. C. Angiogenesis: a harmonized target for recovery after stroke. Stroke 43, 2270–2274 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  185. Reeves, T. M., Prins, M. L., Zhu, J., Povlishock, J. T. & Phillips, L. L. Matrix metalloproteinase inhibition alters functional and structural correlates of deafferentation-induced sprouting in the dentate gyrus. J. Neurosci. 23, 10182–10189 (2003).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  186. Nudo, R. J. Recovery after brain injury: mechanisms and principles. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 7, 887 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  187. Schallert, T., Woodlee, M. T. & Fleming, S. M. in Pharmacology of Cerebral Ischemia 201–216 (Stuttgart, 2002).

    Google Scholar 

  188. Schallert, T., Fleming, S. M., Leasure, J. L., Tillerson, J. L. & Bland, S. T. CNS plasticity and assessment of forelimb sensorimotor outcome in unilateral rat models of stroke, cortical ablation, parkinsonism and spinal cord injury. Neuropharmacology 39, 777–787 (2000).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  189. Schallert, T., Kozlowski, D. A., Humm, J. L. & Cocke, R. R. Use-dependent structural events in recovery of function. Adv. Neurol. 73, 229–238 (1997).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  190. Blasi, F., Whalen, M. J. & Ayata, C. Lasting pure-motor deficits after focal posterior internal capsule white-matter infarcts in rats. J. Cereb. Blood Flow Metab. 35, 977–984 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author is supported by NS056839 and NS078791. The author thanks the Bergeron Family Foundation (Vermont, USA) for enabling experiences at the Georgetown University (Washington DC, USA) and the US National Rehabilitation Hospital Center for Brain Plasticity and Recovery (Washington DC, USA) that informed the content of this Review, and S. K. Subramanian for helpful suggestions on figure 2a.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology and Institute for Neuroscience, University of Texas at Austin, Texas 78712, USA.,

    Theresa A. Jones

Authors
  1. Theresa A. Jones
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Theresa A. Jones.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The author declares no competing financial interests.

PowerPoint slides

Glossary

Callosotomy

The surgical procedure of severing the corpus callosum at the midline.

Non-paretic

Refers to the side of the body that is ipsilateral to the stroke.

Paretic

Showing weakness, ineptitude and partial loss of voluntary movement. Usually most severe on the side of the body that is contralateral to the stroke.

Rehabilitation

A treatment designed to improve functional capacities. It includes physical therapy for motor impairments.

Precision grip

Grasp between the tips of the thumb and a finger.

Motor skill learning

The practice-dependent refinement of novel movement sequences.

Action Research Arm Test

A test that measures the ability to perform various actions with the paretic upper limb, such as grasping differently sized objects and pouring water from a glass.

Homotopic

Describes an anatomical region corresponding to that of the other hemisphere or body side.

Movement representations

The territories in the motor cortex that control discrete movements, such as of the wrist or of a digit. They are usually defined on the basis of movements evoked by electrical stimulation and are also known as a 'motor map'.

Perforated synapses

Synapses with discontinuous postsynaptic densities that are on average larger and more potent in evoking postsynaptic depolarizations than are other synapses.

Multisynaptic boutons

(MSBs). Single boutons that form synapses with more than one postsynaptic dendritic surface.

Paired-pulse protocols

Tests for the facilitation or depression of a stimulation-evoked neural response due to a preceding stimulation.

Crossed collaterals

Branches of an axon that cross the midline to terminate in the hemisphere opposite to that of the originating axon.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jones, T. Motor compensation and its effects on neural reorganization after stroke. Nat Rev Neurosci 18, 267–280 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn.2017.26

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn.2017.26

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing