Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy and Massed Practice
2000; Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; Volume: 31; Issue: 4 Linguagem: Inglês
10.1161/01.str.31.4.983-c
ISSN1524-4628
AutoresEdward Taub, Gitendra Uswatte,
Tópico(s)Balance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
ResumoHomeStrokeVol. 31, No. 4Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy and Massed Practice Free AccessOtherPDF/EPUBAboutView PDFView EPUBSections ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload citationsTrack citationsPermissions ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InMendeleyReddit Jump toFree AccessOtherPDF/EPUBConstraint-Induced Movement Therapy and Massed Practice Edward Taub and Gitendra Uswatte Edward TaubEdward Taub Birmingham Veterans Affairs Medical Center and Department of Psychology, University of Alabama at Birmingham and Gitendra UswatteGitendra Uswatte Birmingham Veterans Affairs Medical Center and Department of Psychology, University of Alabama at Birmingham Originally published1 Apr 2000https://doi.org/10.1161/01.STR.31.4.983-cStroke. 2000;31:983–991To the Editor:Van der Lee and coworkers 1 reported that Constraint-Induced Movement (CI) therapy, compared with bimanual neurodevelopmental treatment (NDT), results in clinically insignificant improvements in the function of the more-impaired arm of persons with chronic stroke. This small effect stands in contrast to the very large improvements in real-world arm use obtained with CI therapy in 3 published studies234 (effect sizes 1.9 to 2.8, Motor Activity Log (MAL);25 large effect size 0.8),6 an as-yet-unpublished placebo-controlled study from our laboratory (effect size 2.5, MAL),78 2 conference presentations,910 and pilot studies from 6 laboratories involved in a national clinical trial of CI therapy with patients with subacute stroke (E. Taub, S. Wolf, C. Winstein, C. Giuliani, D. Good, K. Light, C. Kulkulka, D. Nichols, unpublished data, 1998). Van der Lee et al did not obtain a large treatment effect with their experimental group because the intensity of the therapy provided was inadequate and the subjects selected did not have a large enough deficit before treatment to show substantial benefits from therapy. In addition, we argue that the CI therapy group did not show significantly greater improvement than the bimanual NDT group because this group does not present an appropriate comparison.In this laboratory, primary attention in CI therapy administration is given to training patients on a massed practice basis.278 Patients perform repetitive, behaviorally relevant arm movements with short intertrial and intertask rest periods for 6 to 7 hours daily for at least 2 consecutive weeks. Supervision is provided by a therapist on a continuous, one-on-one basis to ensure intensive practice.1112 Van der Lee et al1 indicate that their experimental patients were treated in groups of 4 by 1 or 2 therapists and that tasks included housekeeping activities, handicrafts, and games. It is unlikely that this treatment format provided patients with adequately intensive practice. When van der Lee and a coauthor visited our laboratory for a week, they described their intended procedure in detail as the performance of hobby-type activities and some ADLs in a relaxed atmosphere without any systematic attempt to get patients to use the more-affected extremity intensively. The actual conduct of the therapy in this fashion was confirmed in a later letter from van der Lee. Before the investigators left this facility, they were strongly advised by 2 senior staff members (J. Crago, MSPT, and S. DeLuca, MA) that what they were planning to do would not work well because it was not sufficiently intense. Their protocol appeared so diffuse that they were told that it would test the minimum intensity of practice needed to produce a clinically meaningful effect.The upper cutoff for experiment intake in our laboratory is a score of 2.5 (less than half as much use of the more-impaired extremity as before the stroke) on the Amount of Use (AOU) scale (range 0 to 5) of the Motor Activity Log (MAL), a semistructured interview of extremity use in the life situation.25 This cutoff is used because the brain injuries of stroke patients impose an upper physiological limit on the amount of improvement that can be produced (a score of 4 on the AOU scale represents "almost normal use"). Furthermore, patients with scores >2.5 do not suffer importantly from "learned nonuse," which is defined as diminished extremity use in the real-world setting relative to ability as measured by a laboratory motor test. Learned nonuse is the target of CI therapy. The mean pretreatment score of experimental subjects in the study of van der Lee et al1 is 2.2 (SD=1.0), which is significantly greater than the scores (mean=1.1, SD=0.7, n=40) of patients in our experiments (P<0.001). The high score indicates that (1) a large minority of patients in the experimental group were too high functioning to have been included in any of the studies cited in the first paragraph and (2) there was little room for treatment-induced improvement in extremity use in the experimental group. In addition, the experimental subjects were higher functioning than their reference subjects on most measures, particularly the MAL, before treatment, thus decreasing the opportunity for improvement relative to the reference group.In using a reference group given bimanual training based on NDT for 6 hours per day, van der Lee et al ignore our reports that conventional physical therapy, when administered in massed practice fashion, produces an effect that is as good as treatment involving training of the more-affected extremity and restraint of the less-affected extremity.57813 These data, in combination with other findings,57813 have identified the effective therapeutic factor in CI therapy as being the massing or concentration of practice, however achieved. It is primarily this factor that is thought to give rise to the massive increase in use-dependent cortical reorganization14 and other large changes in brain activity91516 that appear to be the basis of the long-term changes in motor function reported by us.234812 In this light, the (small) treatment effect for the bimanual NDT reference group is to be expected. There are no articles evaluating NDT on nearly as concentrated a basis as employed by van der Lee et al; in effect, they had 2 experimental groups receiving what could be considered 2 different forms of attenuated CI therapy.Van der Lee et al1 also criticize the MAL on the grounds that it is a subjective measure and has no established validity. Although the MAL relies on self-report, it is a psychometrically robust instrument. The MAL is stable over a 2-week waiting period3 and over a 2-week placebo treatment period,7813 and it has (1) high internal consistency (Cronbach's α=0.88 to 0.95), (2) high interrater reliability (patient compared with primary caregiver, intraclass correlation type [3,1]17 =0.90),5 and (3) high test-retest reliability (r=0.94, P<0.01). Evidence of validity includes the 0.90 correlation between patient and caregiver reports, a perfect correlation with an observational measure of arm use (Actual Amount of Use Test),57 and a strong association between gains on the MAL and brain reorganization.9141516The research from this laboratory was supported by grants B93–629AP and B95–975R from the Rehabilitation Research and Development Service, US Department of Veterans Affairs, and grant HD 34273 from the National Institutes of Health. References 1 van der Lee JH, Wagenaar RC, Lankhorst GJ, Vogelaar TW, Deville WL, Bouter LM. Forced use of the upper extremity in chronic stroke patients: results from a single-blind randomized clinical trial. Stroke.1999; 30:2369–2375.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar2 Taub E, Miller NE, Novack TA, Cook EW III, Fleming WC, Nepomuceno CS, Connell JS, Crago JE. Technique to improve chronic motor deficit after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil.1993; 74:347–354.MedlineGoogle Scholar3 Miltner WHR, Bauder H, Sommer M, Dettmers C, Taub E. Effects of constraint-induced movement therapy on chronic stroke patients: a replication. Stroke.1999; 30:586–592.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar4 Kunkel A, Kopp B, Muller G, Villringer K, Villringer A, Taub E, Flor H. Constraint-induced movement therapy. a powerful new technique to induce motor recovery in chronic stroke patients. Arch Phys Med Rehabil.1999; 80:624–628.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar5 Uswatte G, Taub E. Constraint-induced movement therapy. new approaches to outcome measurement in rehabilitation. In: Stuss DT, Winocur G, Robertson IH, eds. Cognitive Neurorehabilitation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 1999:215–229.Google Scholar6 Cohen J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. New York, NY: Academic Press; 1997.Google Scholar7 Taub E, Crago JE, Uswatte G. Constraint-induced movement therapy. a new approach to treatment in physical rehabilitation. Rehabil Psychol.1998; 43:152–170.CrossrefGoogle Scholar8 Taub E, Uswatte G, Pidikiti R. Constraint-induced movement therapy: a new family of techniques with broad application to physical rehabilitation: a clinical review. J Rehabil Res Dev.1999; 36:237–251.MedlineGoogle Scholar9 Wittenberg GF, Chen R, Ishii K, Croarkin E, Eckloff S, Gerber LH, Taub E, Hallett M, Cohen LG. Task-related and resting regional cerebral blood flow changes after constraint-induced rehabilitation therapy. Paper scheduled for presentation at: Meeting of the American Academy of Neurology; May 2000; San Diego, Calif.Google Scholar10 Koelbel S, Elbert T, Rockstroh B, Sterr A, Jahn T, Taub E. Constraint-induced movement therapy (CIMT) under German conditions. Paper presented at: Meeting of the International Psychophysiological Society; May 1997; Konstanz, Germany.Google Scholar11 Morris DM, Crago JE, DeLuca SC, Pidikiti RD, Taub E. Constraint-induced (CI) movement therapy for motor recovery after stroke. Neurorehabilitation.1997; 9:29–43.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar12 Taub E, Burgio L, Miller NE, Cook EW III, Groomes T, DeLuca S, Crago J. An operant approach to overcoming learned nonuse after CNS damage in monkeys and man: the role of shaping. J Exp Anal Behav.1994; 61:281–293.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar13 Taub E, Wolf SL. Constraint-induced (CI) movement techniques to facilitate upper extremity use in stroke patients. Top Stroke Rehabil.1997; 3:38–61.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar14 Liepert J, Bauder H, Sommer M, Miltner WHR, Dettmers C, Taub E, Weiller C. Motor cortex plasticity during constraint-induced movement therapy in chronic stroke patients. Neurosci Lett.1998; 250:5–8.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar15 Kopp B, Kunkel A, Muehlnickel W, Villringer K, Taub E, Flor H. Plasticity in the motor system related to therapy-induced improvement of movement after stroke. Neuroreport.1999; 10:807–810.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar16 Bauder H, Sommer M, Taub E, Miltner WHR. Effect of CI therapy on movement-related brain potentials. Psychophysiology.1999; 36:S31. Abstract.Google Scholar17 Shrout PE, Fleiss JL. Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull.1979; 86:420–428.CrossrefMedlineGoogle ScholarstrokeahaStrokeStrokeStroke0039-24991524-4628Lippincott Williams & WilkinsResponsevan der Lee Johanna H., MD, Lankhorst Gustaaf J., MD, PhD, Bouter Lex M., , PhD, and Wagenaar Robert C., PhD042000We agree with Drs Taub and Uswatte that the results of the single-blind, randomized, controlled trial we publishedR1 seem to contradict the results of the studies published by Taub et al,R2 Miltner et al,R3 and Kunkel et al.R4 There are, however, important methodological differences between the studies mentioned by Taub and Uswatte and our study, and we consider this to be the most probable explanation of the apparent differences in results. Obviously, we are unable to comment on the unpublished studies mentioned by Taub and Uswatte. The studies presented by Kunkel et al and Miltner et al are uncontrolled case-series studies. Uncontrolled studies can be misleading and will almost always report grossly overestimated treatment effects.R5 There are 2 principal methodological differences between the randomized trial published by Taub et alR2 and our study: the number of patients (9 versus 66, respectively) and the intervention in the control group ("attention-control" versus intensive bimanual treatment, respectively). The contrast between the so-called "attention-control" intervention and the experimental intervention applied by Taub et al comprises not only specific but obviously also nonspecific aspects. In our opinion, this is illustrated by Figure 3 included in the article of Taub et al, in which half of the effect of the treatment in the experimental group appears to take place on day 1 of the treatment. In their letter, Taub and Uswatte mention 3 tentative explanations as to why we did not find a greater treatment effect: inadequate intensity of therapy, inadequate selection of patients, and inadequate contrast between the experimental and the control interventions. Furthermore, they contradict our criticism of the Motor Activity Log (MAL). We will reply to each of these items separately.Intensity of treatment. We are somewhat puzzled by this criticism from Taub and Uswatte, because it is contradicted by their later statement that the improvement in our reference group was the result of the high intensity of treatment ("concentrated schedule of delivery"). Indeed, the intensity of treatment was high in both the experimental and the reference groups in our trial.Selection of patients. It is true that we used a different outcome measure to the MAL to establish the upper cutoff for inclusion in our study, ie, the Action Research Arm (ARA) test, which was a primary outcome measure in our study. It is, indeed, conceivable that at higher pretreatment levels the MAL suffers from a ceiling effect. Nevertheless, we did find differential effects on the MAL, but these did not last.R1 To investigate the assumption that a more rigourous selection of patients would have yielded greater treatment effects, we reanalysed the subgroup of patients in our trial whose pretreatment MAL Amount Of Use (AOU) score was <2.5, as suggested by Taub and Uswatte. Somewhat to our surprise, however, we did not find a statistically significant difference in effectiveness in this subgroup (n=43), the mean difference in improvement on the MAL AOU scale between groups being 0.32 points (95% CI −0.10 to 0.75). This means that it could also be argued that higher-scoring patients are more liable to improve than patients with less residual arm function. On the ARA test, the difference in improvement between groups was significant in this subgroup, ie, 3.4 points (95% CI 1.3 to 5.6) and not notably different from the effect in the entire study population, ie, 3.0 points (95% CI 1.3 to 4.8).Contrast between the experimental and the control interventions. We agree that the contrast between the experimental and the control interventions in our trial was relatively small. The main objective of our study was to investigate the specific effect of forced use, ie, the immobilization of the unaffected arm. We tried to make the control treatment equally intensive, to adjust for the nonspecific effects of treatment intensity. It is, indeed, conceivable that the intensity of the treatment is the most effective aspect of the treatment, designated as constraint-induced movement therapy, but this has not yet been shown in publications of well-designed studies in peer-reviewed journals. As we stated in the discussion paragraph of our article, the improvement in the control group may very well have been the result of the intensive physical and occupational therapy, which was equally intensive in the experimental group. The use of a splint and sling to immobilize the unaffected arm is very unpleasant and potentially dangerous. If a similar effect can be obtained by intensive bimanual treatment, this is of crucial importance for clinical practice. This would imply that the term "constraint-induced" can be replaced by "intensive." The effectiveness of enhanced intensity of treatment for stroke patients has recently been shown by Kwakkel et al.R6Validity and reliability of the MAL. The statement that the MAL is stable over a 2-week waiting period is not confirmed by the data presented by Miltner et al.R3 The MAL AOU and Quality Of Movement (QOM) data differ significantly between first contact and baseline (AOU, P=0.023; QOM, P=0.047), and between baseline and pretreatment (AOU, P=0.006; QOM, P=0.022), respectively (Wilcoxon signed rank test). In 2 of the articles claimed to confirm the stability of the MAL over a 6-week placebo treatment and follow-up period, no data were presented.R7R8 More importantly, the possibility that reported changes on the MAL are the result of a Hawthorne effect remains unchallenged.We hope that the readers, when weighing up the arguments in the letter from Taub and Uswatte and our reply to their criticism, will not forget that to date only 2 randomized controlled trialsR1R2 on the question at issue have been published, of which oursR1 is by far the largest. We therefore wish to reemphasize the importance of our findings. We hope that the positive aspect of our conclusion, that the effect of forced use was clinically relevant in subgroups of patients with sensory disorders and hemineglect, will be a challenging starting point for future research. Previous Back to top Next FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited By Van Hoornweder S, Vanderzande L, Bloemers E, Verstraelen S, Depestele S, Cuypers K, Dun K, Strouwen C and Meesen R (2021) The effects of transcranial direct current stimulation on upper-limb function post-stroke: A meta-analysis of multiple-session studies, Clinical Neurophysiology, 10.1016/j.clinph.2021.05.015, 132:8, (1897-1918), Online publication date: 1-Aug-2021. Porta F, Celian C and Patton J (2021) Upper Extremity Functional Rehabilitation for Stroke Survivors Using Error-Augmented Visual Feedback: Interim Results 2021 43rd Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine & Biology Society (EMBC), 10.1109/EMBC46164.2021.9630799, 978-1-7281-1179-7, (1318-1324) Renner C, Brendel C and Hummelsheim H (2020) Bilateral Arm Training vs Unilateral Arm Training for Severely Affected Patients With Stroke: Exploratory Single-Blinded Randomized Controlled Trial, Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 10.1016/j.apmr.2020.02.007, 101:7, (1120-1130), Online publication date: 1-Jul-2020. Yang C, Long J, Urbin M, Feng Y, Song G, Weng J and Li Z Real-Time Myocontrol of a Human–Computer Interface by Paretic Muscles After Stroke, IEEE Transactions on Cognitive and Developmental Systems, 10.1109/TCDS.2018.2830388, 10:4, (1126-1132) Abdollahi F, Corrigan M, Lazzaro E, Kenyon R, Patton J and Harvey R Error-augmented bimanual therapy for stroke survivors, NeuroRehabilitation, 10.3233/NRE-182413, 43:1, (51-61) Abdollahi F, Case Lazarro E, Listenberger M, Kenyon R, Kovic M, Bogey R, Hedeker D, Jovanovic B and Patton J (2013) Error Augmentation Enhancing Arm Recovery in Individuals With Chronic Stroke, Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair, 10.1177/1545968313498649, 28:2, (120-128), Online publication date: 1-Feb-2014. McCombe Waller S, Whitall J, Jenkins T, Magder L, Hanley D, Goldberg A and Luft A (2014) Sequencing bilateral and unilateral task-oriented training versus task oriented training alone to improve arm function in individuals with chronic stroke, BMC Neurology, 10.1186/s12883-014-0236-6, 14:1, Online publication date: 1-Dec-2014. Mansoori B, Jean-Charles L, Touvykine B, Liu A, Quessy S and Dancause N (2014) Acute inactivation of the contralesional hemisphere for longer durations improves recovery after cortical injury, Experimental Neurology, 10.1016/j.expneurol.2014.01.010, 254, (18-28), Online publication date: 1-Apr-2014. Rutter M (2013) Developmental psychopathology: A paradigm shift or just a relabeling?, Development and Psychopathology, 10.1017/S0954579413000564, 25:4pt2, (1201-1213), Online publication date: 1-Nov-2013. Rutter M (2012) Annual Research Review: Resilience - clinical implications, Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2012.02615.x, 54:4, (474-487), Online publication date: 1-Apr-2013. Merlo A, Goodman A, McClenaghan B and Fritz S (2013) Participants' Perspectives on the Feasibility of a Novel, Intensive, Task-Specific Intervention for Individuals With Chronic Stroke: A Qualitative Analysis, Physical Therapy, 10.2522/ptj.20110147, 93:2, (147-157), Online publication date: 1-Feb-2013. Ines D and Abdelkader G (2011) Mixed reality serious games: The therapist perspective 2011 IEEE 1st International Conference on Serious Games and Applications for Health (SeGAH), 10.1109/SeGAH.2011.6165462, 978-1-4673-0434-4, (1-10) Wu C, Chuang L, Lin K, Chen H and Tsay P (2010) Randomized Trial of Distributed Constraint-Induced Therapy Versus Bilateral Arm Training for the Rehabilitation of Upper-Limb Motor Control and Function After Stroke, Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair, 10.1177/1545968310380686, 25:2, (130-139), Online publication date: 1-Feb-2011. Fritz S, Merlo-Rains A, Rivers E, Peters D, Goodman A, Watson E, Carmichael B and McClenaghan B (2011) An Intensive Intervention for Improving Gait, Balance, and Mobility in Individuals With Chronic Incomplete Spinal Cord Injury: A Pilot Study of Activity Tolerance and Benefits, Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 10.1016/j.apmr.2011.05.006, 92:11, (1776-1784), Online publication date: 1-Nov-2011. Langan J, Doyle S, Hurvitz E and Brown S (2010) Influence of Task on Interlimb Coordination in Adults With Cerebral Palsy, Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 10.1016/j.apmr.2010.07.015, 91:10, (1571-1576), Online publication date: 1-Oct-2010. Nelson C (2010) Neural Development and Lifelong Plasticity Nature and Nurture in Early Child Development, 10.1017/CBO9780511975394.003, (45-69) Meythaler J, Vogtle L and Brunner R (2009) A Preliminary Assessment of the Benefits of the Addition of Botulinum Toxin A to a Conventional Therapy Program on the Function of People With Longstanding Stroke, Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 10.1016/j.apmr.2009.02.026, 90:9, (1453-1461), Online publication date: 1-Sep-2009. Lin K, Chang Y, Wu C and Chen Y (2008) Effects of Constraint-Induced Therapy Versus Bilateral Arm Training on Motor Performance, Daily Functions, and Quality of Life in Stroke Survivors, Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair, 10.1177/1545968308328719, 23:5, (441-448), Online publication date: 1-Jun-2009. JUNG M, KIM J, YOO E, JEON H and YOU J (2009) Long-term Effects of a Group Community-based Constraint-induced Movement Therapy on Motor Recovery and Activities of Daily Living in Community-dwelling Older Adults with Chronic Stroke: A Preliminary Study with 6-month Follow-Up, Asian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 10.11596/asiajot.7.1, 7:1, (1-11), . Vaz D, Alvarenga R, Mancini M, Pinto T, Furtado S and Tirado M (2008) Terapia de movimento induzido pela restrição na hemiplegia: um estudo de caso único, Fisioterapia e Pesquisa, 10.1590/S1809-29502008000300014, 15:3, (298-303), Online publication date: 1-Sep-2008. Myint J, Yuen G, Yu T, Kng C, Wong A, Chow K, Li H and Chun Por Wong (2008) A study of constraint-induced movement therapy in subacute stroke patients in Hong Kong, Clinical Rehabilitation, 10.1177/0269215507080141, 22:2, (112-124), Online publication date: 1-Feb-2008. Kleim J and Jones T (2008) Principles of Experience-Dependent Neural Plasticity: Implications for Rehabilitation After Brain Damage, Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 10.1044/1092-4388(2008/018), 51:1, Online publication date: 1-Feb-2008. Leon S, Nadeau S, de Riesthal M, Crosson B, Rosenbek J and Gonzalez Rothi L (2008) Aphasia Cognitive Neurorehabilitation, 10.1017/CBO9781316529898.031, (435-448) Pulvermüller F and Berthier M (2008) Aphasia therapy on a neuroscience basis, Aphasiology, 10.1080/02687030701612213, 22:6, (563-599), Online publication date: 1-Jun-2008. Burns A, Burridge J and Pickering R (2016) Does the use of a constraint mitten to encourage use of the hemiplegic upper limb improve arm function in adults with subacute stroke?, Clinical Rehabilitation, 10.1177/0269215507079144, 21:10, (895-904), Online publication date: 1-Oct-2007. Patton J, Stoykov M, Kovic M and Mussa-Ivaldi F (2005) Evaluation of robotic training forces that either enhance or reduce error in chronic hemiparetic stroke survivors, Experimental Brain Research, 10.1007/s00221-005-0097-8, 168:3, (368-383), Online publication date: 1-Jan-2006. Patton J, Dawe G, Scharver C, Mussa-Ivaldi F and Kenyon R (2006) Robotics and Virtual Reality: A Perfect Marriage for Motor Control Research and Rehabilitation, Assistive Technology, 10.1080/10400435.2006.10131917, 18:2, (181-195), Online publication date: 30-Sep-2006. Brogårdh C and Sjölund B (2016) Constraint-induced movement therapy in patients with stroke: a pilot study on effects of small group training and of extended mitt use, Clinical Rehabilitation, 10.1191/0269215506cr937oa, 20:3, (218-227), Online publication date: 1-Mar-2006. Lillie R and Mateer C (2006) Constraint-based Therapies as a Proposed Model for Cognitive Rehabilitation, Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation, 10.1097/00001199-200603000-00005, 21:2, (119-130), Online publication date: 1-Mar-2006. Korsukewitz C, Breitenstein C, Schomacher M and Knecht S (2006) Pharmakologische Zusatzbehandlung in der AphasietherapiePresent status and future possibilities of adjuvant pharmacotherapy for aphasia, Der Nervenarzt, 10.1007/s00115-005-2006-6, 77:4, (403-415), Online publication date: 1-Apr-2006. MAHER L, KENDALL D, SWEARENGIN J, RODRIGUEZ A, LEON S, PINGEL K, HOLLAND A and ROTHI L (2006) A pilot study of use-dependent learning in the context of Constraint Induced Language Therapy, Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 10.1017/S1355617706061029, 12:06, Online publication date: 1-Nov-2006. Breitenstein C, Flöel A, Korsukewitz C, Wailke S, Bushuven S and Knecht S (2006) A shift of paradigm: From noradrenergic to dopaminergic modulation of learning?, Journal of the Neurological Sciences, 10.1016/j.jns.2006.05.012, 248:1-2, (42-47), Online publication date: 1-Oct-2006. Bonifer N, Anderson K and Arciniegas D (2009) Constraint-induced therapy for moderate chronic upper extremity impairment after stroke, Brain Injury, 10.1080/02699050400004302, 19:5, (323-330), Online publication date: 1-May-2005. Uswatte G, Foo W, Olmstead H, Lopez K, Holand A and Simms L (2005) Ambulatory Monitoring of Arm Movement Using Accelerometry: An Objective Measure of Upper-Extremity Rehabilitation in Persons With Chronic Stroke, Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 10.1016/j.apmr.2005.01.010, 86:7, (1498-1501), Online publication date: 1-Jul-2005. Rijntjes M, Hobbeling V, Hamzei F, Dohse S, Ketels G, Liepert J and Weiller C (2016) Individual Factors in Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy after Stroke, Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair, 10.1177/1545968305279205, 19:3, (238-249), Online publication date: 1-Sep-2005. Flinn N, Schamburg S, Fetrow J and Flanigan J (2016) The Effect of Constraint-Induced Movement Treatment on Occupational Performance and Satisfaction in Stroke Survivors, OTJR: Occupation, Participation and Health, 10.1177/153944920502500305, 25:3, (119-127), Online publication date: 1-Jun-2005. Vearrier L, Langan J, Shumway-Cook A and Woollacott M (2005) An intensive massed practice approach to retraining balance post-stroke, Gait & Posture, 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2004.09.001, 22:2, (154-163), Online publication date: 1-Oct-2005. Beekhuizen K (2005) New Perspectives on Improving Upper Extremity Function after Spinal Cord Injury, Journal of Neurologic Physical Therapy, 10.1097/01.NPT.0000282248.15911.38, 29:3, (157-162), Online publication date: 1-Sep-2005. Siegert R, Lord S and Porter K (2016) Constraint-induced movement therapy: time for a little restraint?, Clinical Rehabilitation, 10.1191/0269215504cr711oa, 18:1, (110-114), Online publication date: 1-Feb-2004. Levine P and Page S (2015) Modified Constraint-Induced Therapy: A Promising Restorative Outpatient Therapy, Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation, 10.1310/R4HN-51MW-JFYK-2JAN, 11:4, (1-10), Online publication date: 1-Oct-2004. Ling S and Fisher B (2004) Functional Improvement Using Observational Movement Analysis and Task Specific Training for an Individual with Chronic Severe Upper Extremity Hemiparesis, Journal of Neurologic Physical Therapy, 10.1097/01.NPT.0000281189.79135.ae, 28:2, (91-99), Online publication date: 1-Jun-2004. Pierce S, Gallagher K, Schaumburg S, Gershkoff A, Gaughan J and Shutter L (2016) Home Forced Use in an Outpatient Rehabilitation Program for Adults with Hemiplegia: A Pilot Study, Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair, 10.1177/0888439003259424, 17:4, (214-219), Online publication date: 1-Dec-2003. Bonifer N and Anderson K (2003) Application of Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy for an Individual With Severe Chronic Upper-Extremity Hemiplegia, Physical Therapy, 10.1093/ptj/83.4.384, 83:4, (384-398), Online publication date: 1-Apr-2003. (2003) References Stroke Rehabilitation, 10.1016/B978-075064712-0.50012-0, (267-291), . van der Lee H (2002) Geforceerd gebruik van de hemiplegische arm bij chronische cva-patiënten, Neuropraxis, 10.1007/BF03071005, 6:1, (2-7), Online publication date: 1-Feb-2002. Popovic D, Popovic M and Sinkjær T (2002) Neurorehabilitation of Upper Extremities in Humans with Sensory-Motor Impairment, Neuromodulation: Technology at the Neural Interface, 10.1046/j.1525-1403.2002._2009.x, 5:1, (54-67), Online publication date: 1-Jan-2002. Prochazka A, Mushahwar V and McCreery D (2001) Neural prostheses, The Journal of Physiology, 10.1111/j.1469-7793.2001.0099b.x, 533:1, (99-109), Online publication date: 1-May-2001. Jack D, Boian R, Merians A, Tremaine M, Burdea G, Adamovich S, Recce M and Poizner H Virtual reality-enhanced stroke rehabilitation, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering, 10.1109/7333.948460, 9:3, (308-318) van der Lee J (2001) Constraint-induced therapy for stroke: more of the same or something completely different?, Current Opinion in Neurology, 10.1097/00019052-200112000-00010, 14:6, (741-744), Online publication date: 1-Dec-2001. Volk G, Roediger B, Geißler K, Kuttenreich A, Klingner C, Dobel C and Guntinas-Lichius O (2021) Effect of an Intensified Combined Electromyography and Visual Feedback Training on Facial Grading in Patients With Post-paralytic Facial Synkinesis, Frontiers in Rehabilitation Sciences, 10.3389/fresc.2021.746188, 2 Yu C, Wang W, Zhang Y, Wang Y, Hou W, Liu S, Gao C, Wang C, Mo L and Wu J (2017) The Effects of Modified Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy in Acute Subcortical Cerebral Infarction, Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 10.3389/fnhum.2017.00265, 11 SAYGILI F, ELDEMİR S and GÜÇLÜ GÜNDÜZ A (2022) İnme Hastalarında Kısıtlayıcı Zorunlu Hareket Tedavisi Temelli Telerehabilitasyon Uygulamaları, Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, 10.46237/amusbfd.1022290 Taghavi , Luecke and Jeffery (2019) A Neuro-Prosthetic Device for Substituting Sensory Functions during Stance Phase of the Gait, Applied Sciences, 10.3390/app9235144, 9:23, (5144) April 2000Vol 31, Issue 4 Advertisement Article InformationMetrics Copyright © 2000 by American Heart Associationhttps://doi.org/10.1161/01.STR.31.4.983-c Originally publishedApril 1, 2000 PDF download Advertisement
Referência(s)