Changing stroke rehab and research worldwide now.Time is Brain! trillions and trillions of neurons that DIE each day because there are NO effective hyperacute therapies besides tPA(only 12% effective). I have 523 posts on hyperacute therapy, enough for researchers to spend decades proving them out. These are my personal ideas and blog on stroke rehabilitation and stroke research. Do not attempt any of these without checking with your medical provider. Unless you join me in agitating, when you need these therapies they won't be there.

What this blog is for:

My blog is not to help survivors recover, it is to have the 10 million yearly stroke survivors light fires underneath their doctors, stroke hospitals and stroke researchers to get stroke solved. 100% recovery. The stroke medical world is completely failing at that goal, they don't even have it as a goal. Shortly after getting out of the hospital and getting NO information on the process or protocols of stroke rehabilitation and recovery I started searching on the internet and found that no other survivor received useful information. This is an attempt to cover all stroke rehabilitation information that should be readily available to survivors so they can talk with informed knowledge to their medical staff. It lays out what needs to be done to get stroke survivors closer to 100% recovery. It's quite disgusting that this information is not available from every stroke association and doctors group.

Friday, November 10, 2017

Constraint-induced movement therapy in treatment of acute and sub-acute stroke: a meta-analysis of 16 randomized controlled trials

Another waste of time. This should have already been out there in that stroke protocol database with efficacy ratings. When will our stroke leaders set up such a database and stop the waste of time on all these reviews and analysis writeups? Time better spent actually solving all these problems in stroke.
Yeah, solving these is going to be hard work, but leaders tackle the hard jobs, they don't 

RUN AWAY!

and wait for SOMEONE ELSE TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM.
Constraint-induced movement therapy in treatment of acute and sub-acute stroke: a meta-analysis of 16 randomized controlled trials

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the clinical efficacy of constraint-induced movement therapy in acute and sub-acute stroke.

DATA SOURCES:

The key words were stroke, cerebrovascular accident, constraint-induced therapy, forced use, and randomized controlled trial. The databases, including China National Knowledge Infrastructure, WanFang, Weipu Information Resources System, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, PubMed, Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, were searched for studies on randomized controlled trials for treating acute or sub-acute stroke published before March 2016.

DATA SELECTION:

We retrieved relevant randomized controlled trials that compared constraint-induced movement therapy in treatment of acute or sub-acute stroke with traditional rehabilitation therapy (traditional occupational therapy). Patients were older than 18 years, had disease courses less than 6 months, and were evaluated with at least one upper extremity function scale. Study quality was evaluated, and data that met the criteria were extracted. Stata 11.0 software was used for the meta-analysis.

OUTCOME MEASURES:

Fugl-Meyer motor assessment of the arm, the action research-arm test, a motor activity log for amount of use and quality of movement, the Wolf motor function test, and a modified Barthel index.

RESULTS:

A total of 16 prospective randomized controlled trials (379 patients in the constraint-induced movement-therapy group and 359 in the control group) met inclusion criteria. Analysis showed significant mean differences in favor of constraint-induced movement therapy for the Fugl-Meyer motor assessment of the arm (weighted mean difference (WMD) = 10.822; 95% confidence intervals (95% CI): 7.419-14.226), the action research-arm test (WMD = 10.718; 95% CI: 5.704-15.733), the motor activity log for amount of use and quality of movement (WMD = 0.812; 95% CI: 0.331-1.293) and the modified Barthel index (WMD = 10.706; 95% CI: 4.417-16.966).

CONCLUSION:

Constraint-induced movement therapy may be more beneficial than traditional rehabilitation therapy for improving upper limb function after acute or sub-acute stroke.

KEYWORDS:

constraint-induced movement therapy; intensity; meta-analysis; nerve regeneration; neural regeneration; rehabilitation; stroke; upper extremity function

No comments:

Post a Comment