Efficacy of Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy in Early Stroke Rehabilitation

Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair

Volumn 29, Issue 6, 2015, Pages 517-525

  Thrane, Gyrd ^a,b   Askim, Torunn ^c   Stock, Roland ^d   Indredavik, Bent ^d   Gjone, Ragna ^e   Erichsen, Anne ^f   Anke, Audny ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TROMSØ   (Norway)

^b UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL OF NORTH NORWAY   (Norway)

^c NORWEGIAN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Norway)

^d TRONDHEIM UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Norway)

^e VESTFOLD HOSPITAL TRUST   (Norway)

^f OSLO UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Norway)

Author keywords

constraint induced movement therapy; rehabilitation; stroke

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARM DISEASE; ARM MOVEMENT; ARTICLE; CEREBROVASCULAR ACCIDENT; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; CONSTRAINT INDUCED MOVEMENT THERAPY; CONSTRAINT INDUCED THERAPY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DAILY LIFE ACTIVITY; DEXTERITY TEST; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; FUGL MEYER UPPER EXTREMITY MOTOR SCORE; HEALTH STATUS; HUMAN; INTENTION TO TREAT ANALYSIS; MALE; MOTOR PERFORMANCE; MULTICENTER STUDY; NINE HOLE PEG TEST SCORE; OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY; PATIENT CARE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; RATING SCALE; SCORING SYSTEM; STROKE IMPACT SCALE; TREATMENT DURATION; WOLF MOTOR FUNCTION TEST SCORE; ACUTE DISEASE; AGED; ARM; CLINICAL TRIAL; DISABILITY; KINESIOTHERAPY; MIDDLE AGED; MOVEMENT (PHYSIOLOGY); NORWAY; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PROCEDURES; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; SINGLE BLIND PROCEDURE; STROKE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING; ACUTE DISEASE; AGED; ARM; DISABILITY EVALUATION; EXERCISE THERAPY; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MOVEMENT; NORWAY; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; SINGLE-BLIND METHOD; STROKE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84936931059     PISSN: 15459683     EISSN: 15526844     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1545968314558599     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Mark VW, Taub E,. Constraint-induced movement therapy for chronic stroke hemiparesis and other disabilities. Restor Neurol Neurosci. 2004; 22: 317-336.
2. Morris DM, Taub E, Mark VW,. Constraint-induced movement therapy: characterizing the intervention protocol. Eura Medicophys. 2006; 42: 257-268.
3. Taub E, Miller NE, Novack TA,. Technique to improve chronic motor deficit after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1993; 74: 347-354.
4. Dobkin BH,. Neurobiology of rehabilitation. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2004; 1038: 148-170.
5. Kwakkel G, Kollen B, Twisk J,. Impact of time on improvement of outcome after stroke. Stroke. 2006; 37: 2348-2353.
6. Dromerick AW, Edwards DF, Hahn M,. Does the application of constraint-induced movement therapy during acute rehabilitation reduce arm impairment after ischemic stroke? Stroke. 2000; 31: 2984-2988.
7. Boake C, Noser EA, Ro T,. Constraint-induced movement therapy during early stroke rehabilitation. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2007; 21: 14-24.
8. Dromerick AWM, Lang CEP, Birkenmeier RLM,. Very Early Constraint-Induced Movement during Stroke Rehabilitation (VECTORS): a single-center RCT. Neurology. 2009; 73: 195-201.
9. 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.
10. Nijland R, Kwakkel G, Bakers J, van Wegen E,. Constraint-induced movement therapy for the upper paretic limb in acute or sub-acute stroke: a systematic review. Int J Stroke. 2011; 6: 425-433.
11. Hatano S,. Experience from a multicentre stroke register: a preliminary report. Bull World Health Organ. 1976; 54: 541-553.
12. Indredavik B, Salvesen R, Ness H, Thorsvik D,. National Guidelines: Treatment and Rehabilitation After Stroke. Oslo, Norway: The Norwegian Directorate of Health; 2010.
13. Morris DM, Uswatte G, Crago JE, Cook EW III, Taub E,. The reliability of the Wolf motor function test for assessing upper extremity function after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2001; 82: 750-755.
14. Askim T, Dahl AE, Stock R, Langøren E,. Nevrologisk test for funksjon i arm og hånd: Wolf Motor Function test på norsk. Fysioterapeuten. 2009; 76.
15. Wolf SL, Thompson PA, Morris DM,. The EXCITE trial: attributes of the Wolf Motor Function test in patients with subacute stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2005; 19: 194-205.
16. Nijland R, van Wegen E, Verbunt J, van Wijk R, van Kordelaar J, Kwakkel G,. A comparison of two validated tests for upper limb function after stroke: the Wolf Motor Function test and the Action Research Arm test. J Rehabil Med. 2010; 42: 694-696.
17. Whitall J, Savin DN Jr, Harris-Love M, Waller SM,. Psychometric properties of a modified Wolf Motor Function test for people with mild and moderate upper-extremity hemiparesis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2006; 87: 656-660.
18. Wolf SL, Catlin PA, Ellis M, Archer AL, Morgan B, Piacentino A,. Assessing Wolf Motor Function test as outcome measure for research in patients after stroke. Stroke. 2001; 32: 1635-1639.
19. Ang JH, Man DW,. The discriminative power of the Wolf Motor Function test in assessing upper extremity functions in persons with stroke. Int J Rehabil Res. 2006; 29: 357-361.
20. Fugl-Meyer AR, Jaasko L, Leyman I, Olsson S, Steglind S,. The post-stroke hemiplegic patient: 1. A method for evaluation of physical performance. Scand J Rehabil Med. 1975; 7: 13-31.
21. Uswatte G, Foo WL, Olmstead H, Lopez K, Holand A, Simms LB,. Ambulatory monitoring of arm movement using accelerometry: an objective measure of upper-extremity rehabilitation in persons with chronic stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005; 86: 1498-1501.
22. Gladstone DJ, Danells CJ, Black SE,. The Fugl-Meyer assessment of motor recovery after stroke: a critical review of its measurement properties. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2002; 16: 232-240.
23. Mathiowetz V, Weber K, Kashman N, Volland G,. Adult norms for the 9 Hole Peg test of finger dexterity. Occup Ther Res. 1985; 5: 24-38.
24. Heller A, Wade DT, Wood VA, Sunderland A, Hewer RL, Ward E,. Arm function after stroke: measurement and recovery over the first three months. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1987; 50: 714-719.
25. Sunderland A, Tinson D, Bradley L, Hewer RL,. Arm function after stroke: an evaluation of grip strength as a measure of recovery and a prognostic indicator. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1989; 52: 1267-1272.
26. Uswatte G, Miltner WH, Foo B, Varma M, Moran S, Taub E,. Objective measurement of functional upper-extremity movement using accelerometer recordings transformed with a threshold filter. Stroke. 2000; 31: 662-667.
27. Uswatte G, Giuliani C, Winstein C, Zeringue A, Hobbs L, Wolf SL,. Validity of accelerometry for monitoring real-world arm activity in patients with subacute stroke: evidence from the extremity constraint-induced therapy evaluation trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2006; 87: 1340-1345.
28. Lang CE, Wagner JM, Edwards DF, Dromerick AW,. Upper extremity use in people with hemiparesis in the first few weeks after stroke. J Neurol Phys Ther. 2007; 31: 56-63.
29. Thrane G, Emaus N, Askim T, Anke A,. Arm use in patients with subacute stroke monitored by accelerometry: association with motor impairment and influence on self-dependence. J Rehabil Med. 2011; 43: 299-304.
30. Duncan PW, Wallace D, Lai SM, Johnson D, Embretson S, Laster LJ,. The stroke impact scale version 2.0: evaluation of reliability, validity, and sensitivity to change. Stroke. 1999; 30: 2131-2140.
31. Gadbury GL, Coffey CS, Allison DB,. Modern statistical methods for handling missing repeated measurements in obesity trial data: beyond LOCF. Obes Rev. 2003; 4: 175-184.
32. Wolf SL, Winstein CJ, Miller JP,. Effect of constraint-induced movement therapy on upper extremity function 3 to 9 months after stroke: the EXCITE randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2006; 296: 2095-2104.
33. Lin KC, Hsieh YW, Wu CY, Chen CL, Jang Y, Liu JS,. Minimal detectable change and clinically important difference of the Wolf Motor Function test in stroke patients. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2009; 23: 429-434.
34. Ro T, Noser E, Boake C,. Functional reorganization and recovery after constraint-induced movement therapy in subacute stroke: case reports. Neurocase. 2006; 12: 50-60.
35. Platz T, Pinkowski C, van Wijck F, Kim IH, di Bella P, Johnson G,. Reliability and validity of arm function assessment with standardized guidelines for the Fugl-Meyer test, Action Research Arm test and Box and Block test: a multicentre study. Clin Rehabil. 2005; 19: 404-411.
36. De Weerdt WJG,. Measuring recovery of arm-hand function in stroke patients: a comparison of the Brunnstrom-Fugl-Meyer test and the Action Research Arm test. Physiother Can. 1985; 37: 65-70.
37. Winstein CJ, Miller JP, Blanton S,. Methods for a multisite randomized trial to investigate the effect of constraint-induced movement therapy in improving upper extremity function among adults recovering from a cerebrovascular stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2003; 17: 137-152.