Effective targets for constraint-induced movement therapy for patients with upper-extremity impairment after stroke.
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE
Examination of effectiveness of different sites of constraint-induced movement therapy (CI therapy) for upper-extremity impairment of patients after stroke.
SUBJECTS: Patients exhibiting moderate to slight upper-extremity impairment after stroke.
METHODS
The patients received a modified version of CI therapy for a cumulative total of 5 h daily for 10 days. Using Fugl-Meyer scores, shoulder/elbow/forearm, wrist and hand functions were separately assessed before and after treatment. To assess the site-specific effects of CI therapy, before and after scores were statistically compared at each site using Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. Relative effects were evaluated by paired comparison of the results at each site with, in turn, the results at every other site. Instances of single-score increments were, using standard chi-square tests, statistically isolated and compared.
RESULTS
Nineteen patients, 12-169 (median 31) months after stroke, were enrolled in this study and completed the protocol. Age range was 40-81 (median 65) years old and pretreatment Fugl-Meyer total scores spanned 31-64 (median 48). Analyses detected statistically significant improvements for wrist, hand and coordination but not for shoulder/elbow/forearm subcomponents. For the hand, at least single-point increments were observed in 74% of the population, while only 47% showed similar increments for the shoulder/elbow/forearm, and 53% for the wrist. Statistical analysis revealed that a higher proportion had increments in hand scores.
CONCLUSIONS
Statistical analysis shows that CI therapy is most beneficial for treating hand function, suggesting an efficient application of this treatment.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
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.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.