Download PDF
neuroreha 2012; 4(03): 135-142
DOI: 10.1055/s-0032-1326906
Schwerpunkt Wahrnehmung: Aus der Praxis
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Assessments und Behandlungsansätze bei Sensibilitätsstörungen – vom Schattendasein zum Übungsprogramm

Klaus Starrost
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
12 September 2012 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Sensibilität ist ein wichtiger Teilbereich der Wahrnehmung. Dazu gehören: Tast-, Vibrations- und Berührungsempfinden, Temperatur- und Schmerzempfinden sowie die Fähigkeit, Gelenkstellungen und Bewegungen wahrzunehmen. Patienten mit Sensibilitätsstörungen sind in ihrem Alltag eingeschränkt, da sie Reize verzögert, unsicher oder falsch interpretieren und auch die Motorik beeinflusst sein kann. Dieser Artikel gibt einen Überblick über Sensibilitätstests, erklärt den Unterschied zwischen passivem und aktivem Sensibilitätstraining und gibt praktische Tipps für die Therapie. Nützlich sind auch die vielen Internethinweise, die den Lesern zusätzliche Informationen bieten. Klaus Starrost

 
  • 1 Acerra NE, Souvlis T, Moseley G. Does mirror-box therapy improve sensory and motor changes in the early post-stroke population? A randomised controlled trial. Aust J Physiother 2005; 51(4-e Suppl): S7
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 2 Busse M, Tyson S. How many body locations need to be tested when assessing sensation after stroke? An investigation of redundancy in the Rivermead Assessment of Somatosensory Performance. Clin Rehabil 2009; 23: 91-95
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Cambier DC, De Corte E, Danneels LA et al. Treating sensory impairments in the post-stroke upper limb with intermittent pneumatic compression. Results of a preliminary trial. Clinical Rehabilitation 2003; 17: 14-20
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Carey LM, Matyas TA, Oke LE. Sensory loss in stroke patients: effective training of tactile and proprioceptive discrimination. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1993; 74: 602-611
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Carey L, Macdonell R, Matyas TA. SENSe: Study of the Effectiveness of Neurorehabilitation on Sensation: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2011; 25: 304
  • 6 Chang JJ, Tsau JC, Lin YT. Predictors of shoulder subluxation in stroke patients. Gaoxiong Yi Xue Ke Xue Za Zhi 1995; 11: 250-256
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 7 Chen JC, Liang CC, Shaw FZ. Facilitation of sensory and motor recovery by thermal intervention for the hemiplegic upper limb in acute stroke patients. Stroke 2005; 36: 2665-2669
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Dannenbaum RM, Michaelsen SM, Desrosoiers J. Development and evaluation of two new sensory tests of the hand for patients with stroke. Clin Rehab 2002; 16: 630-639
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Dinse HR, Kattenstroh JC, Tegenthoff M et al. Plastizität, motorisches Lernen und sensible Stimulation. In: Dettmers C, Stephan KM, Hrsg. Motorische Therapie nach Schlaganfall. 1. Aufl. Bad Honnef: Hippocampus Verlag; 2011
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Doyle S, Bennett S, Fasoli SE et al. Interventions for sensory impairment in the upper limb after stroke. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2010; (6)
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 11 Dukelow SP, Herter TM, Moore KD et al. Quantitative assessment of limb position sense following stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2010; 24: 178-187
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 12 French B. Does repetitive task training improve functional activity after stroke? A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Rehabil Med 2010; 42: 9-15
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Gamble GE, Barberan E, Bowsher D et al. Post stroke shoulder pain: more common than previously realized. Eur J Pain 2000; 4: 313-315
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Huber M. Feedback als therapeutische Technik. Weniger ist manchmal mehr. physiopraxis 2007; JR31225-15: 36-39
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 15 Jebsen RH, Taylor N, Trieschmann RB et al. An objective and standardized test of hand function. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 1969; 50: 311-319
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 16 Kalra L. Stroke Rehabilitation 2009: Old Chestnuts and New Insights. Stroke 2010; 41 () e88-e90
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Klingner CM, Witte OW, Günther A. Sensory syndromes. Front Neurol Neurosci 2012; 30: 4-8
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 18 Law M, Baptiste S, McColl M et al. The Canadian Occupational Performance Measure: An outcome measurement protocol for occupational therapy. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy 1990; 57: 82-87
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 19 Laible M, Grieshammer S, Seidel G et al. Association of Activity Changes in the Primary Sensory Cortex With Successful Motor Rehabilitation of the Hand Following Stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair Published online before print 06.03.2012;
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 20 Lincoln NB, Jackson JM, Adams SA. Reliability and Revision of the Nottingham Sensory Assessment for stroke patients. Physiotherapy 1998; 84: 358-365
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Lyle RC. A performance test for assessment of upper limb function in physical rehabilitation treatment and research. Int J of Rehabilitation Research 1981; 4 () 483-492
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 22 Nakaten A, Govers J, Dohle C. Spiegeltherapie in der Neurologie. 1. Aufl. Idstein: Schulz-Kirchner; 2009
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 23 Mudie MH, Matyas TA. Can simultaneous bilateral movement involve the undamaged hemisphere in reconstruction of neural networks damaged by stroke?. Disabil Rehabil 2000; 22: 23-37
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Platz T, Roschka S. Rehabilitative Therapie bei Armparese nach Schlaganfall. Neurol Rehabil 2009; 15: 81-106
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 25 Rand D, Gottlieb D, Weiss P. Recovery of patients with a combined motor and proprioception deficit during the first six weeks of post stroke rehabilitation. Phys Occup Ther Geriatr 2001; 18: 69-87
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 26 Renner CJ E, Hummelsheim H. Sensomotorisches Diskriminationstraining. In: Nowak D, Hrsg. Handfunktionsstörungen in der Neurologie. 1. Aufl. Berlin: Springer Verlag; 2011
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 27 Schabrun SM, Hillier S. Evidence for the retraining of sensation after stroke: a systematic review. Clin Rehabil 2009; 23: 27-27
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 28 Thieme H. Das Spiegelbild als Partner. physiopraxis 2009; 10 () 26-29
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 29 Tremblay F, Wong K, Sanderson S. Tactile spatial acuity in elderly persons: assessment with grating domes and relationship with manual dexterity. Somatosens Mot Res 2003; 20: 127-132
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 30 Van Peppen RP, Kwakkel G, Wood-Dauphinee S. The impact of physical therapy on functional outcomes after stroke: what‘s the evidence?. Clin Rehabil 2004; 18: 833-862
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 31 Weiss T, Miltner WH, Liepert J. Rapid functional plasticity in the primary somatomotor cortex and perceptual changes after nerve block. Eur J Neurosci 2004; 20: 3413-3423
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 32 Winward CE, Halligan PW, Wade DT. Current practice and clinical relevance of somatosensory assessment after stroke. Clin Rehabil 1999; 13: 48-55
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 33 Winward CE, Halligan PW, Wade DT. The Rivermead Assessment of Somatosensory Performance (RASP): standardisation and reliability data. Clin Rehabil 2002; 16: 523-533
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 34 Yekutiel M, Guttman E. A controlled trial of the retraining of the sensory function of the hand in stroke patients. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1993; 56: 241-244
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 35 Yozbartiran N, Donmez B, Kayak N et al. Electrical stimulation of wrist and fingers for sensory and functional recovery in acute hemiplegia. Clin Rehabil 2006; 20: 4-11
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar