Use the Back button in your browser to see the other results of your search or to select another record.

Detailed Search Results

Comparing two different modes of task practice during lower limb constraint-induced movement therapy in people with stroke: a randomized clinical trial
Abdullahi A, Aliyu NU, Useh U, Abba MA, Akindele MO, Truijen S, Saeys W
Neural Plasticity 2021 Feb 1;(6664058):Epub
clinical trial
7/10 [Eligibility criteria: Yes; Random allocation: Yes; Concealed allocation: Yes; Baseline comparability: Yes; Blind subjects: No; Blind therapists: No; Blind assessors: Yes; Adequate follow-up: Yes; Intention-to-treat analysis: Yes; Between-group comparisons: Yes; Point estimates and variability: No. Note: Eligibility criteria item does not contribute to total score] *This score has been confirmed*

BACKGROUND: Constraint-induced movement therapy (CIMT) is used for the rehabilitation of motor function after stroke. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the effects of lower limb CIMT that uses number of repetition of tasks with the one that uses number of hours of practice. METHOD: The study was a randomized clinical trial approved by the Ethics Committee of Kano State Ministry of Health. Fifty-eight people with stroke participated in the study. Groups 1 and 2 performed daily 600 repetitions and 3 hours of task practice, respectively, 5 times weekly for 4 weeks. Motor impairment (primary outcome), balance, functional mobility, knee extensor spasticity, walking speed and endurance, and exertion before and after commencement of activities were assessed at baseline and postintervention. The data was analyzed using Friedmann and Mann-Whitney U tests. RESULT: The results showed that there was only significant difference (p < 0.05) in knee extensor spasticity (group 1 (median 0 (0), mean rank 27.50); group 2 (median 0 (0), mean rank 31.64)), exertion before commencement of activities (group 1 (median 0 (0.5), mean rank 21.90); group 2 (median 1 (0.5), mean rank 37.64)), and exertion after commencement of activities (group 1 (median 1 (1), mean rank 20.07); group 2 (median 1 (0), mean rank 39.61) postintervention in favour of the experimental group (group 1)). CONCLUSION: The group 1 protocol is more effective at improving outcomes after stroke.

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