No clue what neuroanimation therapy is and certainly not buying the paper since it is not better than the comparison option.
Comparing a Novel Neuroanimation Experience to Conventional Therapy for High-Dose Intensive Upper-Limb Training in Subacute Stroke: The SMARTS2 Randomized Trial
Abstract
Background
Evidence from animal studies suggests that greater reductions in poststroke motor impairment can be attained with significantly higher doses and intensities of therapy focused on movement quality.(So you don't believe that errors and error correction are faster ways to learn? See link below.) These studies also indicate a dose-timing interaction, with more pronounced effects if high-intensity therapy is delivered in the acute/subacute, rather than chronic, poststroke period.
Do People With Severe Traumatic Brain Injury Benefit From Making Errors? A Randomized Controlled Trial of Error-Based and Errorless Learning
The relevant line from there:
Conclusion. EBL was found to be more effective than ELL for enhancing skills generalization on a task related to training and improving self-awareness and behavioral competency.
Objective
To compare 2 approaches of delivering high-intensity, high-dose upper-limb therapy in patients with subacute stroke: a novel exploratory neuroanimation therapy (NAT) and modified conventional occupational therapy (COT).
Methods
A total of 24 patients were randomized to NAT or COT and underwent 30 sessions of 60 minutes time-on-task in addition to standard care. The primary outcome was the Fugl-Meyer Upper Extremity motor score (FM-UE). Secondary outcomes included Action Research Arm Test (ARAT), grip strength, Stroke Impact Scale hand domain, and upper-limb kinematics. Outcomes were assessed at baseline, and days 3, 90, and 180 posttraining. Both groups were compared to a matched historical cohort (HC), which received only 30 minutes of upper-limb therapy per day.
No comments:
Post a Comment