Use of the non-paretic arm reflects a habitual behaviour in chronic stroke.

Background: A proportion of stroke survivors use their paretic arm less than might be expected based on their level of impairment. The resulting underuse of the paretic arm has a negative impact on participation in neurorehabilitation and functional independence. However, non-use remains poorly understood. One possibility is that prioritising the non-paretic arm reflects a habit, despite residual functional capacity in the paretic arm.

Methods: 30 chronic stroke survivors (Mean Fugl Meyer Upper Limb Score: 28.9 ± 11.3) participated in a simplified version of the forced response paradigm, which reliably identifies the presence of a habit. Participants were asked to choose which arm to use to maximise points scored during a reaching task. During half of the trials, the presumed habit of using the non-paretic arm yielded more points, whereas in the other half using the non-paretic arm incurred a loss of points. Participants completed two versions of this task, once with unlimited response time available and once without.

Results: Participants scored fewer points in the limited response condition compared to the unlimited response conditions. This difference was driven by a selective increase in the use of the non-paretic arm in trials where the paretic arm yielded more points. The results were not mediated by former hand dominance.

Conclusions: Our results demonstrate that not using the non-paretic arm may reflect a habit response that is more readily triggered in demanding (e.g. time-limited) situations. This may explain why successful neurorehabilitation does not always result in a more functionally useful arm. Our results pave the way for targeted interventions such as habit breaking techniques to be included in clinical practise.