Vojta therapy improves postural control in very early stroke rehabilitation: a randomised controlled pilot trial

Corina Epple, Barbara Maurer-Burkhard, Mari-Carmen Lichti, Thorsten Steiner, Corina Epple, Barbara Maurer-Burkhard, Mari-Carmen Lichti, Thorsten Steiner

Abstract

Background: It is still unclear, which physiotherapeutic approaches are most effective in stroke recovery. Vojta therapy is a type of physiotherapy that was originally developed for children and adolescents with cerebral palsy. Vojta therapy has been reported to improve automatic control of body posture. Because acute stroke patients are characterised by a disturbance in the ability to adapt to changes in body position, requiring automatic postural adjustment, we decided to investigate Vojta therapy in the early rehabilitation of stroke patients. Aim of the trial was to test the hypothesis that Vojta therapy - as a new physiotherapeutic approach in early stroke recovery - improves postural control and motor function in patients with acute ischaemic stroke (AIS) or intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH).

Methods: This prospective, randomised controlled trial included patients with imaging-confirmed AIS or ICH, severe hemiparesis and randomly assigned them to Vojta therapy or standard physiotherapy within 72 h after stroke onset. Main exclusion criterion was restricted ability to communicate. Primary endpoint was the improvement of postural control measured by the Trunk Control Test (TCT) on day 9 after admission. Secondary endpoint among others was improvement of arm function (measured with Motor Evaluation Scale for Upper Extremity in Stroke Patients [MESUPES]).

Results: Forty patients (20 per group) were randomised into the trial. Median age was 75 (66-80) years, 50% were women. The median improvement in TCT within 9 days was 25.5 points (=25.5%) (interquartile range [IQR] 12.5-42.5) in the Vojta group and 0 (IQR 0-13) in the control group (p = 0.001). Patients treated with Vojta therapy achieved a greater improvement in the MESUPES than patients in the control group (20% vs 10%, p = 0.006).

Conclusion: This first randomised controlled trial of Vojta therapy in acute stroke patients demonstrates improvement of postural control through Vojta therapy compared to standard physiotherapy. Although this trial has some methodical weaknesses, Vojta therapy might be a promising approach in early stroke rehabilitation and should be studied in larger trials.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03035968. Registered 30 January 2017 - Retrospectively registered; http://www.clinicaltrials.gov.

Keywords: Acute stroke; Physiotherapy; Postural control; Rehabilitation; Stroke recovery; Vojta therapy.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interestsBM received a speaker honoraria from the International Vojta Society (IVS) The other authors declare that they have no competing interests.

© The Author(s) 2020.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Consort diagram on trial flow. MRCS = medical research council scale for muscle strength; mRS = modified Rankin Scale
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Difference in Trunc control test (TCT) scores between baseline and day 9. The median improvement in the TCT within 9 days (primary outcome) was 25.5 points (=25.5%) (IQR 12.5–42.5) in the Vojta group and 0 (IQR 0–13) in the control group (p = 0.001). Data are presented as box-and-whisker plots, in which the top and bottom of the rectangles indicate the 75th and 25th percentiles, respectively; the horizontal lines within the rectangles indicate the 50th percentile (median); the lines above and below the rectangles indicate the minimum and maximum of all of the data, so far as this are no outlier. Outlier are data lying outside the box > 1,5 lenghts of the box (IQR) and are presented as a small circle
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Difference in Catherine Bergego Scale (CBS) scores between baseline and day 9. The median improvement in the CBS (Neglect test) within 9 days was 2 points (=33.3%) (IQR 1–2) in the Vojta group and 1 point (=16.6%) (IQR 0–2) in the control group (p = 0.054). Data are presented as box-and-whisker plots
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Difference in motor evaluation scale for upper extremity in stroke patients (MESUPES) scale scores between baseline and day 9. The median improvement in the MESUPES within 9 days was 4 points (=20%) (IQR 1.5–6) in the Vojta group and 2 points (=10%) (IQR 0–5) in the control group (p = 0.006). Data are presented as box-and-whisker plots
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Difference in National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) scores between baseline and day 9. The median improvement in the NIHSS within 9 days was 4 points (=9.5%) (IQR2.5–5.5) in the Vojta group and 2 points (= 4.8%) (IQR 0–4) in the control group (p = 0.022). Data are presented as box-and-whisker plots

References

    1. Benjamin EJ, Blaha MJ, Chiuve SE, Cushman M, Das SR, Deo R, et al. Heart disease and stroke statistics-2017 update: A report from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2017;135(10):e146–e603. doi: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000485.
    1. Mendis S. Stroke disability and rehabilitation of stroke: World Health Organization perspective. International Journal of Stroke. 2013;8(1):3–4. doi: 10.1111/j.1747-4949.2012.00969.x.
    1. Pollock A, Baer G, Campbell P, Choo PL, Forster A, Morris J, et al. Physical rehabilitation approaches for the recovery of function and mobility following stroke. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2014;4:CD001920. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001920.pub3.
    1. Kwakkel G, Kollen BJ. Predicting activities after stroke: What is clinically relevant? International Journal of Stroke. 2013;8(1):25–32. doi: 10.1111/j.1747-4949.2012.00967.x.
    1. Vojta V. Reflex rotation as a pathway to human locomotion. Zeitschrift für Orthopädie und Ihre Grenzgebiete. 1970;108(3):446–452.
    1. Massion J. Movement, posture and equilibrium: Interaction and coordination. Progress in Neurobiology. 1992;38(1):35–56. doi: 10.1016/0301-0082(92)90034-C.
    1. Ha SY, Sung YH. Effects of Vojta method on trunk stability in healthy individuals. Journal of Exercise Rehabilitation. 2016;12(6):542–547. doi: 10.12965/jer.1632804.402.
    1. Vojta V. Reflex creeping as an early rehabilitation programme. Zeitschrift für Kinderheilkunde. 1968;104(4):319–330. doi: 10.1007/BF00440004.
    1. Vojta V, Peters A. Das Vojta-Prinzip. Heidelberg: Springer; 2007.
    1. Hok P, Opavsky J, Kutin M, Tudos Z, Kanovsky P, Hlustik P. Modulation of the sensorimotor system by sustained manual pressure stimulation. Neuroscience. 2017;348:11–22. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2017.02.005.
    1. Takakusaki K. Neurophysiology of gait: From the spinal cord to the frontal lobe. Movement Disorders. 2013;28(11):1483–1491. doi: 10.1002/mds.25669.
    1. Takakusaki K, Chiba R, Nozu T, Okumura T. Brainstem control of locomotion and muscle tone with special reference to the role of the mesopontine tegmentum and medullary reticulospinal systems. Journal of Neural Transmission (Vienna) 2016;123(7):695–729. doi: 10.1007/s00702-015-1475-4.
    1. Jung MW, Landenberger M, Jung T, Lindenthal T, Philippi H. Vojta therapy and neurodevelopmental treatment in children with infantile postural asymmetry: A randomised controlled trial. Journal of Physical Therapy Science. 2017;29(2):301–306. doi: 10.1589/jpts.29.301.
    1. Lim H, Kim T. Effects of vojta therapy on gait of children with spastic diplegia. Journal of Physical Therapy Science. 2013;25(12):1605–1608. doi: 10.1589/jpts.25.1605.
    1. Cramer SC, Chopp M. Recovery recapitulates ontogeny. Trends in Neurosciences. 2000;23(6):265–271. doi: 10.1016/S0166-2236(00)01562-9.
    1. Hadders-Algra M. Early human motor development: From variation to the ability to vary and adapt. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews. 2018;90:411–427. doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2018.05.009.
    1. Hedberg A, Forssberg H, Hadders-Algra M. Postural adjustments due to external perturbations during sitting in 1-month-old infants: Evidence for the innate origin of direction specificity. Experimental Brain Research. 2004;157(1):10–17. doi: 10.1007/s00221-003-1811-z.
    1. Murphy TH, Corbett D. Plasticity during stroke recovery: From synapse to behaviour. Nature Reviews. Neuroscience. 2009;10(12):861–872. doi: 10.1038/nrn2735.
    1. Tasseel-Ponche S, Yelnik AP, Bonan IV. Motor strategies of postural control after hemispheric stroke. Neurophysiologie Clinique. 2015;45(4–5):327–333. doi: 10.1016/j.neucli.2015.09.003.
    1. Paternostro-Sluga T, Grim-Stieger M, Posch M, Schuhfried O, Vacariu G, Mittermaier C, et al. Reliability and validity of the Medical Research Council (MRC) scale and a modified scale for testing muscle strength in patients with radial palsy. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine. 2008;40(8):665–671. doi: 10.2340/16501977-0235.
    1. Rankin J. Cerebral vascular accidents in patients over the age of 60. II. Prognosis. Scottish Medical Journal. 1957;2(5):200–215. doi: 10.1177/003693305700200504.
    1. Brott T, Adams HP, Jr, Olinger CP, Marler JR, Barsan WG, Biller J, et al. Measurements of acute cerebral infarction: A clinical examination scale. Stroke. 1989;20(7):864–870. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.20.7.864.
    1. Collin C, Wade D. Assessing motor impairment after stroke: A pilot reliability study. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry. 1990;53(7):576–579. doi: 10.1136/jnnp.53.7.576.
    1. Duarte E, Marco E, Muniesa JM, Belmonte R, Diaz P, Tejero M, Escalada F. Trunk control test as a functional predictor in stroke patients. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine. 2002;34(6):267–272. doi: 10.1080/165019702760390356.
    1. Franchignoni FP, Tesio L, Ricupero C, Martino MT. Trunk control test as an early predictor of stroke rehabilitation outcome. Stroke. 1997;28(7):1382–1385. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.28.7.1382.
    1. Sheikh K, Smith DS, Meade TW, Brennan PJ, Ide L. Assessment of motor function in studies of chronic disability. Rheumatology and Rehabilitation. 1980;19(2):83–90. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/19.2.83.
    1. Verheyden G, Nieuwboer A, Van de Winckel A, De Weerdt W. Clinical tools to measure trunk performance after stroke: A systematic review of the literature. Clinical Rehabilitation. 2007;21(5):387–394. doi: 10.1177/0269215507074055.
    1. Kasner SE. Clinical interpretation and use of stroke scales. Lancet Neurology. 2006;5(7):603–612. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(06)70495-1.
    1. Azouvi P, Olivier S, de Montety G, Samuel C, Louis-Dreyfus A, Tesio L. Behavioral assessment of unilateral neglect: Study of the psychometric properties of the Catherine Bergego scale. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. 2003;84(1):51–57. doi: 10.1053/apmr.2003.50062.
    1. Azouvi P, Samuel C, Louis-Dreyfus A, Bernati T, Bartolomeo P, Beis JM, et al. Sensitivity of clinical and behavioural tests of spatial neglect after right hemisphere stroke. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry. 2002;73(2):160–166. doi: 10.1136/jnnp.73.2.160.
    1. Johansson GM, Hager CK. Measurement properties of the motor evaluation scale for upper extremity in stroke patients (MESUPES) Disability and Rehabilitation. 2012;34(4):288–294. doi: 10.3109/09638288.2011.606343.
    1. Van de Winckel A, Feys H, van der Knaap S, Messerli R, Baronti F, Lehmann R, et al. Can quality of movement be measured? Rasch analysis and inter-rater reliability of the motor evaluation scale for upper extremity in stroke patients (MESUPES) Clinical Rehabilitation. 2006;20(10):871–884. doi: 10.1177/0269215506072181.
    1. Dromerick AW, Edwards DF, Diringer MN. Sensitivity to changes in disability after stroke: A comparison of four scales useful in clinical trials. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development. 2003;40(1):1–8. doi: 10.1682/JRRD.2003.01.0001.
    1. Collin C, Wade DT, Davies S, Horne V. The Barthel ADL index: A reliability study. International Disability Studies. 1988;10(2):61–63. doi: 10.3109/09638288809164103.
    1. Mahoney FI, Barthel DW. Functional evaluation: The Barthel index. Maryland State Medical Journal. 1965;14:61–65.
    1. Ali M, English C, Bernhardt J, Sunnerhagen KS, Brady M, Collaboration, V.I.-R More outcomes than trials: A call for consistent data collection across stroke rehabilitation trials. International Journal of Stroke. 2013;8(1):18–24. doi: 10.1111/j.1747-4949.2012.00973.x.
    1. Veerbeek JM, Van Wegen EE, Harmeling-Van der Wel BC, Kwakkel G, Investigators E. Is accurate prediction of gait in nonambulatory stroke patients possible within 72 hours poststroke? The EPOS study. Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair. 2011;25(3):268–274. doi: 10.1177/1545968310384271.
    1. Bernhardt J, Hayward KS, Kwakkel G, Ward NS, Wolf SL, Borschmann K, et al. Agreed definitions and a shared vision for new standards in stroke recovery research: The stroke recovery and rehabilitation roundtable taskforce. International Journal of Stroke. 2017;12(5):444–450. doi: 10.1177/1747493017711816.
    1. Weinrich M, Good DC, Reding M, Roth EJ, Cifu DX, Silver KH, et al. Timing, intensity, and duration of rehabilitation for hip fracture and stroke: Report of a workshop at the National Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research. Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair. 2004;18(1):12–28. doi: 10.1177/0888439003262041.
    1. Biernaskie J, Chernenko G, Corbett D. Efficacy of rehabilitative experience declines with time after focal ischemic brain injury. The Journal of Neuroscience. 2004;24(5):1245–1254. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3834-03.2004.
    1. Kwakkel G, Wagenaar RC, Kollen BJ, Lankhorst GJ. Predicting disability in stroke--a critical review of the literature. Age and Ageing. 1996;25(6):479–489. doi: 10.1093/ageing/25.6.479.
    1. Kwakkel G, Lannin NA, Borschmann K, English C, Ali M, Churilov L, et al. Standardized measurement of sensorimotor recovery in stroke trials: Consensus-based core recommendations from the stroke recovery and rehabilitation roundtable. International Journal of Stroke. 2017;12(5):451–461. doi: 10.1177/1747493017711813.
    1. Bernhardt J, Godecke E, Johnson L, Langhorne P. Early rehabilitation after stroke. Current Opinion in Neurology. 2017;30(1):48–54. doi: 10.1097/WCO.0000000000000404.

Source: PubMed

3
Abonnieren