This Article Full Text (OnlineFirst PDF) All Versions of this Article: 1545968308328719v1 23/5/441    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 Chen, Y.-a. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Lin, K.-c. Articles by Chen, Y.-a. Pubmed/NCBI databases Medline Plus Health Information Arm Injuries and Disorders Stroke Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Effects of Constraint-Induced Therapy Versus Bilateral Arm Training on Motor Performance, Daily Functions, and Quality of Life in Stroke Survivors

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

	Abstract

Background and Objective. This study investigated the relative effects of distributed constraint-induced therapy (CIT) and bilateral arm training (BAT) on motor performance, daily function, functional use of the affected arm, and quality of life in patients with hemiparetic stroke. Methods. A total of 60 patients were randomized to distributed CIT, BAT, or a control intervention of less specific but active therapy. Each group received intensive training for 2 hours/day, 5 days/week, for 3 weeks. Pretreatment and posttreatment measures included the Fugl–Meyer Assessment (FMA), Functional Independence Measure (FIM), Motor Activity Log (MAL), and Stroke Impact Scale (SIS). The proximal and distal scores of FMA were used to examine separate upper limb (UL) elements of movement. Results. The distributed CIT and BAT groups showed better performance in the overall and the distal part score of the FMA than the control group. The BAT group exhibited greater gains in the proximal part score of the FMA than the distributed CIT and control groups. Enhanced performance was found for the distributed CIT group in the MAL, the subtest of locomotion in the FIM, and certain domains of the SIS (eg, ADL/IADL). Conclusion. BAT may uniquely improve proximal UL motor impairment. In contrast, distributed CIT may produce greater functional gains for the affected UL in subjects with mild to moderate chronic hemiparesis.

First published on December 31, 2008, doi:10.1177/1545968308328719

Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair 2009;23:441.

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


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

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. E. Stoykov, G. N. Lewis, and D. M. Corcos Comparison of Bilateral and Unilateral Training for Upper Extremity Hemiparesis in Stroke Neurorehabil Neural Repair, November 1, 2009; 23(9): 945 - 953. [Abstract] [PDF]