Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 12, 2026
Surface Electromyographic Biofeedback as a Rehabilitation Tool for Patients with Global Brachial Plexus Injury Receiving Bionic Reconstruction
Published on: September 28, 2019
Recovery of arm function in patients with paresis after traumatic brain injury
D I Katz1, M P Alexander, R B Klein
1Neurology Department, Healthsouth Braintree Hospital Rehabilitation Network, MA 02185, USA.
Objective:
To characterize the frequency of recovery of arm paresis in patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) admitted to rehabilitation.
Design:
Retrospective review identifying a cohort of patients with moderate or severe arm paresis after TBI followed at least 6 months postinjury.
Setting:
Freestanding acute rehabilitation hospital TBI unit.
Patients And Methods:
Forty-four patients with moderate to severe arm paresis were selected from 264 consecutive admissions and characterized by injury pathology subtype, injury severity (duration of unconsciousness [loss of consciousness, LOC] and posttraumatic amnesia [PTA]), age, and level of paresis according to Brunnstrom Stages of Recovery (BS 1 to 6). Patient groups with and without arm paresis were compared according to these variables (t tests and chi(2)).
Main Outcome Measures:
Recovery of arm paresis to isolated motor function (BS 5 or 6) and time to achieve recovery. Recovered and nonrecovered patients were compared (Mann-Whitney, t tests, and chi(2)) on injury severity, initial level of paresis, age, time to rehabilitation admission, and pathology subtype. Time to recovery was compared for patients at different levels of initial paresis, ranges of LOC, and pathology subtypes (Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis tests).
Results:
Forty-four patients (17%) had moderate (BS 3 to 4) or severe (BS 1 to 2) paresis at rehabilitation admission. They were more severely injured than nonparetic patients based on longer LOC (p < .002) and PTA (p < .009). Thirty-six patients (82%) recovered by 6 months; 72% of these recovered by 2 months. If still paretic at 2 months, only 56% recovered. Mean recovery time was 6.9 weeks (SD, 6.1) from injury. Time to recovery was best predicted by initial level of paresis and injury severity (r2 = .48), but not age. Patients with diffuse injury tended towards a more protracted recovery (7.9 weeks, SD 6.5) than patients with focal injury (4.2 weeks, SD 3.9) (p = .08) and only those with diffuse injury showed further recovery after 3 months.
Conclusions:
Arm paresis after TBI is relatively infrequent. Most patients recover by 2 months but later recovery is possible, especially in patients with primarily diffuse brain damage. Recovery is highly related to initial impairment, injury severity, and distribution of brain injury.
