Study to assess the effectiveness of modified constraint-induced movement therapy in stroke subjects: A randomized controlled trial

Priyanka Singh, Bijayeta Pradhan, Priyanka Singh, Bijayeta Pradhan

Abstract

Background and purpose: The purpose of this study was to assess the effectiveness of modified constraint induced movement therapy (m-CIMT) in stroke subjects.

Materials and methods: A total of forty sub-acute stroke subjects were randomly assigned to either a m-CIMT (n = 20) or in a control group (n = 20). The m-CIMT group (14 men, 6 women; mean age = 55.2 years) consisted of structured 2 h therapy sessions emphasizing affected arm use, occurring 5 times/week for 2 weeks. A mitt was used to restrain the unaffected arm for 10 h/day for 2 week. The control group (11 men, 9 women; mean age = 56.4 years) consisted of conventional rehabilitation for time-matched exercise program. The outcome measures were evaluated at pre- and post-intervention by using the Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT) and Fugl-Meyer assessment (FMA) of motor recovery after stroke.

Results: After intervention significant effects were observed in m-CIMT group on WMFT (pre-test and post-test score was 28.04 ± 6.58, 13.59 ± 2.86; P =0.003). Similarly on FMA (pre- and post-test score was 31.15 ± 6.37, 55.7 ± 6.4; P = 0.00).

Conclusion: There is a significant improvem ent in upper extremity function so it indicates that m-CIMT is effective in improving the motor function of the affected arm in stroke subjects. However, its long-term effect has not proved since there was no follow-up after intervention.

Keywords: Constraint induced movement therapy; exercise; rehabilitation; stroke.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest: Nil.

References

    1. Jones SP, Leathley MJ, McAdam JJ, Watkins CL. Physiological monitoring in acute stroke: A literature review. J AdvNurs. 2007;60:577–94.
    1. Pang MY, Ashe MC, Eng JJ. Muscle weakness, spasticity and disuse contribute to demineralization and geometric changes in the radius following chronic stroke. Osteoporos Int. 2007;18:1243–52.
    1. Boake C, Noser EA, Ro T, Baraniuk S, Gaber M, Johnson R, et al. Constraint-induced movement therapy during early stroke rehabilitation. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2007;21:14–24.
    1. Grotta JC, Noser EA, Ro T, Boake C, Levin H, Aronowski J, et al. Constraint-induced movement therapy. Stroke. 2004;35:2699–701.
    1. Friel KM, Nudo RJ. Recovery of motor function after focal cortical injury in primates: Compensatory movement patterns used during rehabilitative training. Somatosens Mot Res. 1998;15:173–89.
    1. Kleim JA, Barbay S, Nudo RJ. Functional reorganization of the rat motor cortex following motor skill learning. J Neurophysiol. 1998;80:3321–5.
    1. Nudo RJ, Milliken GW. Reorganization of movement representations in primary motor cortex following focal ischemic infarcts in adult squirrel monkeys. J Neurophysiol. 1996;75:2144–9.
    1. Sabatini U, Toni D, Pantano P, Brughitta G, Padovani A, Bozzao L, et al. Motor recovery after early brain damage. A case of brain plasticity. Stroke. 1994;25:514–7.
    1. Page SJ, Sisto S, Johnston MV, Levine P. Modified constraint-induced therapy after subacute stroke: A preliminary study. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2002;16:290–5.
    1. Wolf SL. Revisiting constraint-induced movement therapy: Are we too smitten with the mitten. Is all nonuse“learned”? And other quandaries. Phys Ther. 2007;87:1212–23.
    1. Page SJ, Levine P, Sisto S, Bond Q, Johnston MV. Stroke patients’ and therapists’ opinions of constraint-induced movement therapy. Clin Rehabil. 2002;16:55–60.
    1. Blanton S, Wolf SL. An application of upper-extremity constraint-induced movement therapy in a patient with subacute stroke. Phys Ther. 1999;79:847–53.
    1. Page SJ, Sisto SA, Levine P, Johnston MV, Hughes M. Modified constraint induced therapy: A randomized feasibility and efficacy study. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2001;38:583–90.
    1. Page SJ, Sisto SA, Levine P. Modified constraint-induced therapy in chronic stroke. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2002;81:870–5.
    1. Page SJ, Sisto S, Johnston MV, Levine P, Hughes M. Modified constraint-induced therapy in subacute stroke: A case report. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2002;83:286–90.
    1. Page SJ, Levine P, Leonard AC. Modified constraint-induced therapy in acute stroke: A randomized controlled pilot study. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2005;19:27–32.
    1. Page SJ, Sisto S, Levine P, McGrath RE. Efficacy of modified constraint-induced movement therapy in chronic stroke: A single-blinded randomized controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004;85:14–8.
    1. Hakkennes S, Keating JL. Constraint-induced movement therapy following stroke: A systematic review of randomised controlled trials. Aust J Physiother. 2005;51:221–31.
    1. Szaflarski JP, Page SJ, Kissela BM, Lee JH, Levine P, Strakowski SM. Cortical reorganization following modified constraint-induced movement therapy: A study of 4 patients with chronic stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2006;87:1052–8.
    1. Fritz SL, Light KE, Patterson TS, Behrman AL, Davis SB. Active finger extension predicts outcomes after constraint-induced movement therapy for individuals with hemiparesis after stroke. Stroke. 2005;36:1172–7.
    1. Wolf SL, Winstein CJ, Miller JP, Taub E, Uswatte G, Morris D, et al. Effect of constraint-induced movement therapy on upper extremity function 3 to 9 months after stroke: The EXCITE randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2006;296:2095–104.
    1. Wolf SL, Winstein CJ, Miller JP, Thompson PA, Taub E, Uswatte G, et al. Retention of upper limb function in stroke survivors who have received constraint-induced movement therapy: The EXCITE randomised trial. Lancet Neurol. 2008;7:33–40.
    1. Taub E, Miller NE, Novack TA, Cook EW, 3rd, Fleming WC, Nepomuceno CS, et al. Technique to improve chronic motor deficit after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1993;74:347–54.
    1. Wolf SL, Lecraw DE, Barton LA, Jann BB. Forced use of hemiplegic upper extremities to reverse the effect of learned nonuse among chronic stroke and head-injured patients. ExpNeurol. 1989;104:125–32.
    1. Morris DM, Uswatte G, Crago JE, Cook EW, 3rd, Taub E. The reliability of the wolf motor function test for assessing upper extremity function after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2001;82:750–5.
    1. Schmidt RA. Motor Control and Learning. 2nd ed. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics; 1988.
    1. Liepert J, Bauder H, Wolfgang HR, Miltner WH, Taub E, Weiller C. Treatment-induced cortical reorganization after stroke in humans. Stroke. 2000;31:1210–6.
    1. Classen J, Liepert J, Wise SP, Hallett M, Cohen LG. Rapid plasticity of human cortical movement representation induced by practice. J Neurophysiol. 1998;79:1117–23.
    1. Desmurget M, Grafton S. Forward modeling allows feedback control for fast reaching movements. Trends CognSci. 2000;4:423–31.
    1. van der Lee JH, Wagenaar RC, Lankhorst GJ, Vogelaar TW, Devillé WL, Bouter LM. Forced use of the upper extremity in chronic stroke patients: Results from a single-blind randomized clinical trial. Stroke. 1999;30:2369–75.
    1. Sterr A, Elbert T, Berthold I, Kölbel S, Rockstroh B, Taub E. Longer versus shorter daily constraint-induced movement therapy of chronic hemiparesis: An exploratory study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2002;83:1374–7.

Source: PubMed

スポンサーと協力者

医学的状態

薬物療法

3
購読する