This Article Full Text (OnlineFirst PDF) All Versions of this Article: 1545968308320642v1 23/2/160    most recent Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Lin, K.-c. Articles by Hsu, C.-j. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Lin, K.-c. Articles by Hsu, C.-j. Pubmed/NCBI databases Medline Plus Health Information Arm Injuries and Disorders Movement Disorders Stroke Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Constraint-Induced Therapy Versus Dose-Matched Control Intervention to Improve Motor Ability, Basic/Extended Daily Functions, and Quality of Life in Stroke

^* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: cywu{at}mail.cgu.edu.tw.

	Abstract

Background. Trials of constraint-induced movement therapy (CIT) to improve upper extremity function after stroke have usually not included an actively treated control group. Objective. This study compared a modified CIT intervention with a dose-matched control intervention that included restraint of the less affected hand and assessed for differences in motor and functional performance and health-related quality of life. Methods. This 2-group randomized controlled trial, using pretreatment and posttreatment measures, enrolled 32 patients within 6 to 40 months after onset of a first stroke (mean age, 55.7 years). They received either CIT (restraint of the less affected limb combined with intensive training of the affected limb for 2 hours daily 5 days per week for 3 weeks and restraint of the less affected hand for 5 hours outside of the rehabilitation training) or a conventional intervention with hand restraint for the same duration. Outcome measures were the Fugl-Meyer Assessment, Functional Independence Measure, Motor Activity Log, Nottingham Extended Activities of Daily Living Scale, and Stroke Impact Scale. Results. Compared with the control group, the CIT group exhibited significantly better performance in motor function, level of functional independence, mobility of extended activities during daily life, and health-related quality of life after treatment. Conclusions. The robust effects of this form of CIT were demonstrated in various aspects of outcome, including motor function, basic and extended functional ability, and quality of life.

First published on November 3, 2008, doi:10.1177/1545968308320642

Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair 2009;23:160.

A more recent version of this article appeared on February 1, 2009


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. Clarke, H. Mala, V. Windle, G. Chernenko, and D. Corbett The Effects of Repeated Rehabilitation "Tune-Ups" on Functional Recovery After Focal Ischemia in Rats Neurorehabil Neural Repair, November 1, 2009; 23(9): 886 - 894. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. L. Wolf On "Effects of forced use on arm function in the subacute phase..." Hammer AM, Lindmark B. Phys Ther. 2009;89:526-539. Physical Therapy, September 1, 2009; 89(9): 993 - 995. [Full Text] [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]