Interest and costs of neurorehabilitation of brain injury patients

It doesn't say anything useful in the abstract and I'm not going to buy the complete article in French.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21634145?dopt=Abstract

[Article in French]

Mühl A, Vuadens P.

Source

Clinique romande de réadaptation (SuvaCare), Av. Grand Champsec 90, 1951 Sion. andreas.muehl@crr-suva.ch

Abstract

The severity of the initial deficit and the improvement in the first weeks are the strongest indicators for a favorable outcome after stroke. Meta-analyses attempt to evaluate the efficacy of neurorehabilitation, but the results are unconclusive due to the heterogeinity of the groups of patients and therapies. However, there is sufficient data to conclude that repetitive, high intensity, task orientated training is efficacious. New approaches (mental imagery, robotics, virtual therapies...) are also useful but are not better than physiotherapy. It is as important to individualize the approach in a multidisciplinary well organised and communicative setting and to treat early complications. Cerebral plasticity is an individualized process and limited in time, so therapy should be regularly adapted and stopped if the deficit remains stable. Oh I disagree! The statement is made with no scientific backing. This individualization is a copout. So is multidisciplinary.

By using the word task-oriented they are falling into the common trap of only working on therapies for damaged neurons, not the therapy needed to recover functionality from the dead brain area. These researchers really need a survivor to tell them where they are going wrong.