Your conclusion is totally wrong. If you want to vastly reduce stroke impairment and at least give it a fighting chance for recovery with existing therapy, you have to
solve the 5 causes of the neuronal cascade of death in the first days.
By solving that you would save billions of neurons making it much more likely that you can improve the atrocious 10% chance of getting fully recovered.
Neurotechnology’s Prospects for Bringing About Meaningful Reductions in Neurological Impairment
Abstract
Here
we report and comment on the magnitudes of post-stroke impairment
reduction currently observed using new neurotechnologies. We argue that
neurotechnology’s best use case is impairment reduction as this is
neither the primary strength nor main goal of conventional
rehabilitation, which is better at targeting the activity and
participation levels of the ICF. The neurotechnologies discussed here
can be divided into those that seek to be adjuncts for enhancing
conventional rehabilitation, and those that seek to introduce a novel
behavioral intervention altogether. Examples of the former include
invasive and non-invasive brain stimulation. Examples of the latter
include robotics and some forms of serious gaming. We argue that motor
learning and training-related recovery are conceptually and
mechanistically distinct. Based on our survey of recent results, we
conclude that large reductions in impairment will need to begin with
novel forms of high dose and high intensity behavioral intervention that
are qualitatively different to conventional rehabilitation. Adjunct
forms of neurotechnology, if they are going to be effective, will need
to piggyback on these new behavioral interventions.
No comments:
Post a Comment