BACKGROUND: Modified constraint induced movement therapy (m-CIMT) discourages the use of the unaffected extremity and encourages the active use of the hemiplegic arm in order to restore the motor function. AIM: The aim was to assess the efficacy of m-CIMT on functional recovery of upper extremity (UE) in acute stroke patients, as compared to conventional rehabilitation therapy. DESIGN: This is a prospective comparative study. SETTING: This study included sixty patients with acute stroke recruited from neurology department. METHODS: This study included sixty acute stroke patients. Inclusion criteria were: patients within two weeks from the onset of stroke, persistent hemiparesis leading to impaired upper extremity function, evidence of preserved cognitive function, and a minimum of 10 degrees of active finger extension and 20 degrees of active wrist extension. Exclusion criteria were: intra-cerebral hemorrhage, previous stroke on the same side, presence of neglect or a degree of aphasia impeding understanding of instructions, and conditions that limit the use of the upper limb before the stroke. Patients were assessed by Fugl-Meyer motor assessment (FMA), action research arm test (ARAT) and motor evoked potentials (MEPs), recorded from the abductor pollicis brevis (APB) of the affected hand. The clinical and neurophysiological tests were performed pre and postrehabilitation. The patients were divided into two groups: conventional rehabilitation program group (CRP) included 30 patients who were given a conventional rehabilitation program for two weeks. CIMT group included 30 patients who were subjected to modified CIMT for two consecutive weeks. Total treatment time was the same in both groups. RESULTS: CRP group showed a non-significant improvement in FMA and ARAT. CIMT group showed a significant improvement in clinical scores on all tests (p < 0.05). When comparing both groups using FMA and ARAT tests pre- and post- therapy, a significant difference (p < 0.05) was found between both groups with CIMT group showing greater improvement. When comparing MEPs in CRP group, pre and postrehabilitation, a non-significant improvement was found for resting motor threshold (RMT), central motor conduction time (CMCT) and amplitude of MEPs. In contrast, each of the MEP parameters exhibited a significant improvement in CIMT group (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: In contrast to conventional rehabilitation therapy, modified CIMT revealed a significant functional and MEP improvement in acute stroke patients indicating that m-CIMT might be a more efficient treatment strategy.

Full text (sometimes free) may be available at these link(s):      help

• PubMed
• PDF locator
• publisher