|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
|
Looking in the Rear View Mirror When Conversing With Back Seat Drivers: The EXCITE Trial Revisited
Steven L. Wolf, PhD, PT, FAPTA, FAHA
swolf{at}emory.edu
Carolee J. Winstein, PhD, PT, FAPTA
J. Phillip Miller, AB
Sarah Blanton, ABDPT, NCS
Patricia C. Clark, PhD, RN, FAHA, FAAN
Deborah Nichols-Larsen, PhD, PT
The initial Point of View: Directions for Research (Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair, 2007;21:3-13) identified confounders that might limit the impact that rehabilitation multicenter clinical trials may have upon altering practice patterns. Part of that viewpoint addressed the Extremity Constraint Induced Therapy Evaluation (EXCITE) Trial and highlighted some of its perceived strengths and limitations. The present Point of View expands upon factors worthy of consideration in planning and executing clinical trials in neurorehabilitation based upon experiences encountered by the EXCITE team. Cost factors and patient attributes, both of which profoundly influence the ability of clinical researchers to execute the ideal study, are among these factors. In particular, the costs associated with large trials necessitate compromise in study design or implementation, resulting in a dichotomy between what should be undertaken and what can be accomplished.
Key Words: Rehabilitation • Stroke • Randomized clinical trials • Constraint-induced movement therapy • Hemiplegia • Upper extremity.
This version was published on October
1, 2007
Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair, Vol. 21, No. 5,
379-387 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/1545968307306238
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
|
|
 
K. Bogard, S. Wolf, Qin Zhang, P. Thompson, D. Morris, and D. Nichols-Larsen
Can the Wolf Motor Function Test be Streamlined?
Neurorehabil Neural Repair,
June 1, 2009;
23(5):
422 - 428.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
K.-c. Lin, Y.-h. Huang, Y.-w. Hsieh, and C.-y. Wu
Potential Predictors of Motor and Functional Outcomes After Distributed Constraint-Induced Therapy for Patients With Stroke
Neurorehabil Neural Repair,
May 1, 2009;
23(4):
336 - 342.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. H. Dobkin
Progressive Staging of Pilot Studies to Improve Phase III Trials for Motor Interventions
Neurorehabil Neural Repair,
March 1, 2009;
23(3):
197 - 206.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. Fujiwara, Y. Kasashima, K. Honaga, Y. Muraoka, T. Tsuji, R. Osu, K. Hase, Y. Masakado, and M. Liu
Motor Improvement and Corticospinal Modulation Induced by Hybrid Assistive Neuromuscular Dynamic Stimulation (HANDS) Therapy in Patients With Chronic Stroke
Neurorehabil Neural Repair,
February 1, 2009;
23(2):
125 - 132.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. L. Woodbury, D. R. Howland, T. E. McGuirk, S. B. Davis, C. R. Senesac, S. Kautz, and L. G. Richards
Effects of Trunk Restraint Combined With Intensive Task Practice on Poststroke Upper Extremity Reach and Function: A Pilot Study
Neurorehabil Neural Repair,
January 1, 2009;
23(1):
78 - 91.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. A. Thrasher, V. Zivanovic, W. McIlroy, and M. R. Popovic
Rehabilitation of Reaching and Grasping Function in Severe Hemiplegic Patients Using Functional Electrical Stimulation Therapy
Neurorehabil Neural Repair,
November 1, 2008;
22(6):
706 - 714.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. L Wolf
On "Modified constraint-induced therapy..." Page et al. Phys Ther. 2008;88:333-340.
Physical Therapy,
May 1, 2008;
88(5):
680 - 684.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
