A cool name which is probably why it made the research cut.
http://search.naric.com/research/rehab/redesign_record.cfm?search=2&type=all&criteria=J64901&phrase=no&rec=120135
Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair
, Volume 26(8)
, Pgs. 976-987.
NARIC Accession Number: J64901. What's this?
ISSN: 1545-9683.
Author(s): Talelli, Penelope; Wallace, Amanda; Dileone, Michelle; Hoad, Damon; Cheeran, Binith; Oliver, Rupert; VandenBos, Mehdi; Hammerbeck, Ulrike; Barratt, Karen; Gillini, Cecilia; Musumeci, Gabriella; Boudrias, Marie-Helene; Cloud, Geoffrey C.; Ball, Joanna; Marsden, Jonathan F.; Ward, Nicholas S.; Di Lazzaro, Vincenzo; Greenwood, Richard G.; Rothwell, John C..
Publication Year: 2012.
Number of Pages: 12.
Abstract: Study explored whether long-lasting
clinically important differences can be achieved by adding theta burst
stimulation (TBS), a form of repetitive transcranial magnetic
stimulation, to a rehabilitation program for the hand. Forty-one chronic
stroke patients received excitatory TBS to the ipsilesional hemisphere
or inhibitory TBS to the contralesional hemisphere in 2 centers; each
active group was compared with a group receiving sham TBS. TBS was
followed by physical therapy for 10 working days. Patients and
therapists were blinded to the type of TBS. Primary outcome measures,
the 9-hole Peg Test (9HPT), the Jebsen Taylor Test (JTT), and grip and
pinch-grip dynamometry, were assessed 4, 30, and 90 days after
treatment. The clinically important difference was defined as 10 percent
of the maximum score for each test. Results showed no differences
between the active treatment and sham groups in any of the outcome
measures. All patients achieved small sustainable improvements (9HPT, 5
percent of maximum; JTT, 5.7 percent; and grip strength, 6 percent), all
below the defined clinically important level. In this study, cortical
stimulation did not augment the gains from a late rehabilitation
program.
No comments:
Post a Comment