case_images: PMC9633176_01
case_images: Brain images of the study patient. Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance images of the patient (day 3 from stroke onset). Multiple infarctions in the bilateral cerebrum were observed, mainly in the left parietal and occipital cortex/bilateral prefrontal cortex, as cortical lesions basal ganglia (left caudate nucleus) were presented as a subcortical lesion.
case_images: CRINM2022-4828549.001.jpg
case_images: PMC9633176_01_CRINM2022-4828549.001.jpg
case_images: fig1
case_images: The patient is a 62-year-old right-handed man whose ischemic stroke affected both cerebral hemispheres, with the left side being more involved (Figure 1).
case_images: Experimental study procedure. CBS: catherine bergego scale, CAS: clinical assessment for spontaneity, and PRPS: pittsburgh rehabilitation participation scale.
case_images: CRINM2022-4828549.002.jpg
case_images: PMC9633176_01_CRINM2022-4828549.002.jpg
case_images: fig2
case_images: The entire process took six weeks (Figure 2).
case_images: Trend of outcomes in each term. The downslope of CBS and CAS indicate an improving trend. The upslope of PRPS indicate an improving trend. CBS: catherine bergego scale, CAS: clinical assessment for spontaneity, and PRPS: pittsburgh rehabilitation participation scale.
case_images: CRINM2022-4828549.003.jpg
case_images: PMC9633176_01_CRINM2022-4828549.003.jpg
case_images: fig3
case_images: Both term comparisons and effect sizes were comparable, but the trend of improvement was significant in the second term (Table 3, Figure 3). The effect size in the second term was significantly larger than in the first term (Tau-U = -0.68, p=0.01, 90% CI [-1, -0.245], large change), and the difference in effect size between the second and first terms was larger than that between the third and second terms (Tau-U = -0.57, p=0.031, 90% CI [-1, -0.135], moderate change). Term comparisons were comparable, but effect sizes were more significant in the second term (Table 3, Figure 3). The effect size in the second term was significantly larger than that in the first term (Tau-U = 0.54, p=0.041, 90% CI [0.105-0.975], moderate change). The third term did not show a significant effect size (Tau-U = 0.43, p=0.104, 90% CI [-0.005-0.865]). Term comparisons and effect sizes were more significant in the second term (Table 3, Figure 3).