Background and Purpose-Kinesthesia, the sense of body motion, is essential to proper control and execution of movement.Despite its importance for activities of daily living, no current clinical measures can objectively measure kinesthetic deficits. The goal of this study was to use robotic technology to quantify prevalence and severity of kinesthetic deficits of the upper limb poststroke. Methods-Seventy-four neurologically intact subjects and 113 subjects with stroke (62 left-affected, 51 right-affected) performed a robot-based kinesthetic matching task with vision occluded. The robot moved the most affected arm at a preset speed, direction, and magnitude. Subjects were instructed to mirror-match the movement with their opposite arm (active arm). Results-A large number of subjects with stroke were significantly impaired on measures of kinesthesia. We observed impairments in ability to match movement direction (69% and 49% impaired for left-and right-affected subjects, respectively) and movement magnitude (42% and 31%). We observed impairments to match movement speed (32% and 27%) and increased response latencies (48% and 20%). Movement direction errors and response latencies were related to clinical measures of function, motor recovery, and dexterity. Conclusions-Using a robotic approach, we found that 61% of acute stroke survivors (n=69) had kinesthetic deficits.Additionally, these deficits were highly related to existing clinical measures, suggesting the importance of kinesthesia in day-to-day function. Our methods allow for more sensitive, accurate, and objective identification of kinesthetic deficits after stroke. With this information, we can better inform clinical treatment strategies to improve poststroke rehabilitative care and outcomes.

Background and Purpose-Developing a better understanding of the trajectory and timing of stroke recovery is critical for developing patient-centered rehabilitation approaches. Here, we quantified proprioceptive and motor deficits using robotic technology during the first 6 months post stroke to characterize timing and patterns in recovery. We also make comparisons of robotic assessments to traditional clinical measures. Methods-One hundred sixteen subjects with unilateral stroke were studied at 4 time points: 1, 6, 12, and 26 weeks post stroke. Subjects performed robotic assessments of proprioceptive (position sense and kinesthesia) and motor function (unilateral reaching task and bimanual object hit task), as well as several clinical measures (Functional Independence Measure, Purdue Pegboard, and Chedoke-McMaster Stroke Assessment). Results-One week post stroke, many subjects displayed proprioceptive (48% position sense and 68% kinesthesia) and motor impairments (80% unilateral reaching and 85% bilateral movement). Interindividual recovery on robotic measures was highly variable. However, we characterized recovery as early (normal by 6 weeks post stroke), late (normal by 26 weeks post stroke), or incomplete (impaired at 26 weeks post stroke). Proprioceptive and motor recovery often followed different timelines. Across all time points, robotic measures were correlated with clinical measures. Conclusions-These results highlight the need for more sensitive, targeted identification of sensory and motor deficits to optimize rehabilitation after stroke. Furthermore, the trajectory of recovery for some individuals with mild to moderate stroke may be much longer than previously considered.