Dae-Hyouk Bang1, Won-Seob Shin1,2, Ho-Suk Choi1. 1. Department of Physical Therapy, Graduate School of Daejeon University, Daejeon, Republic of Korea. 2. Department of Physical Therapy, College of Health and Medical Science, Daejeon University, Daejeon, Republic of Korea.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Reducing the compensatory mechanism by restraining the unnecessary movement may be helpful in relearning the upper-limb movement. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of a modified constraint-induced movement therapy (mCIMT) with trunk restraint (TR) in chronic stroke patients with moderate impairment. METHODS:Eighteen participants with hemiparesis were randomly assigned to mCIMT + TR or mCIMT. Each group underwent 20 (1 h/d) intervention session (5 d/wk for 4 weeks). Patients were assessed with the action research arm test (ARAT), the Fugl-Meyer assessment upper extremity (FMA-UE), the modified Barthel index (MBI), and the motor activity log (MAL-AOU and MAL-QOM). RESULTS: The mCIMT combined with trunk restraint group exhibited greater changes in the ARAT, FMA, MBI, and MAL (MAL-AOU and MAL-QOM) compared with the mCIMT group. Statistical analyses showed significantly different in ARAT (Z = -2.17, P = 0.03), FMA-UE (Z = -2.49, P = 0.01), MBI (Z = -2.44, P = 0.02), MAL-AOU (Z = -2.17, P = 0.03), and MAL-QOM (Z = -2.17, P = 0.03) between groups. CONCLUSION: These finding suggest that mCIMT combined with trunk restraint is more helpful to improve upper-extremity function than mCIMT only in patient with chronic stroke.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Reducing the compensatory mechanism by restraining the unnecessary movement may be helpful in relearning the upper-limb movement. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of a modified constraint-induced movement therapy (mCIMT) with trunk restraint (TR) in chronic strokepatients with moderate impairment. METHODS: Eighteen participants with hemiparesis were randomly assigned to mCIMT + TR or mCIMT. Each group underwent 20 (1 h/d) intervention session (5 d/wk for 4 weeks). Patients were assessed with the action research arm test (ARAT), the Fugl-Meyer assessment upper extremity (FMA-UE), the modified Barthel index (MBI), and the motor activity log (MAL-AOU and MAL-QOM). RESULTS: The mCIMT combined with trunk restraint group exhibited greater changes in the ARAT, FMA, MBI, and MAL (MAL-AOU and MAL-QOM) compared with the mCIMT group. Statistical analyses showed significantly different in ARAT (Z = -2.17, P = 0.03), FMA-UE (Z = -2.49, P = 0.01), MBI (Z = -2.44, P = 0.02), MAL-AOU (Z = -2.17, P = 0.03), and MAL-QOM (Z = -2.17, P = 0.03) between groups. CONCLUSION: These finding suggest that mCIMT combined with trunk restraint is more helpful to improve upper-extremity function than mCIMT only in patient with chronic stroke.
Entities:
Keywords:
Modified constraint-induced movement therapy; trunk restraint; upper-extremity function
Authors: M Saes; M I Mohamed Refai; B J F van Beijnum; J B J Bussmann; E P Jansma; P H Veltink; J H Buurke; E E H van Wegen; C G M Meskers; J W Krakauer; G Kwakkel Journal: Neurorehabil Neural Repair Date: 2022-01-31 Impact factor: 3.919