Archives de pediatrie : organe officiel de la Societe francaise de pediatrie · 2022
Comparing the effects of modified constraint-induced movement therapy and bimanual training in children with hemiplegic cerebral palsy mainstreamed in regular school: A randomized controlled study.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Bingöl Hasan, Günel Mintaze Kerem
Аннотация
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the effects of modified constraint-induced movement therapy (mCIMT) and bimanual training (BIT) based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health, Children and Youth (ICF-CY) conceptual framework.
RESEARCH METHOD: A total of 32 children (mean age 10.43 years [SD 2.9 years]; 15 girls, 17 boys) whose functional motor and communication levels, according to the Manual Ability Classification System, Gross Motor Function Classification System, and Communication Function Classification System, changed between level I and III were randomly distributed to one of the mCIMT or BIT groups with equivalent dosing frequencies and intensities (10 weeks, 3 days/week, 2.5 h/day). Upper extremity body function outcomes (handheld dynamometer), activity outcomes (Quality of Upper Extremity Skills Test, The Children's Hand-use Experience Questionnaire, ABILHAND-Kids, Pediatric Upper Extremity Motor Activity Log), and participation outcomes (Child and Adolescent Scale of Participation) were assessed before and after treatment, and at 16 weeks postintervention. The clinical trial number of the study is NCT04577391.
RESULTS: mCIMT resulted in more significant improvements in all outcomes than BIT at the immediate postintervention period (T2), which were maintained in the mCIMT group throughout the 16-week postintervention period (p<0.001; dmCIMT > dBIT).
CONCLUSION: The potential advantage of mCIMT versus BIT is the larger short-term effect sizes (ESs) and the more sustainable improvements.
RESEARCH METHOD: A total of 32 children (mean age 10.43 years [SD 2.9 years]; 15 girls, 17 boys) whose functional motor and communication levels, according to the Manual Ability Classification System, Gross Motor Function Classification System, and Communication Function Classification System, changed between level I and III were randomly distributed to one of the mCIMT or BIT groups with equivalent dosing frequencies and intensities (10 weeks, 3 days/week, 2.5 h/day). Upper extremity body function outcomes (handheld dynamometer), activity outcomes (Quality of Upper Extremity Skills Test, The Children's Hand-use Experience Questionnaire, ABILHAND-Kids, Pediatric Upper Extremity Motor Activity Log), and participation outcomes (Child and Adolescent Scale of Participation) were assessed before and after treatment, and at 16 weeks postintervention. The clinical trial number of the study is NCT04577391.
RESULTS: mCIMT resulted in more significant improvements in all outcomes than BIT at the immediate postintervention period (T2), which were maintained in the mCIMT group throughout the 16-week postintervention period (p<0.001; dmCIMT > dBIT).
CONCLUSION: The potential advantage of mCIMT versus BIT is the larger short-term effect sizes (ESs) and the more sustainable improvements.